textweek

Religious Dimension of the National Democratic Convention

At PBS Religion & Ethics Newsweekly: Religious Aspects of the Democratic National Convention:

"Lawton: American voters, according to polls, want a president who is religious. But they are more divided about how religious, and how much religion should guide policies. So there is that ambivalence. Also, I think religious voters don't want to see their faith exploited for political purposes. So the tone of these efforts is going to be very important."

Commentary on the Democratic National Convention by Robin W. Lovin (Cary Maguire University Professor of Ethics at Southern Methodist University):

"The Democratic Party managed to lay claim to some core values in American political life this week. In the process, it may have made an important change in its own political rhetoric."

William C. Placher (LaFollette Distinguished Professor in the Humanities at Wabash College in Crawfordsville, Indiana):

"Watching the Democratic convention, it was easy to start thinking of religion as something black people do."

and Susan Ford Wiltshire (chairs the department of classical studies at Vanderbilt University. Her essay, "Standing on the Promises: Absolutes and Imagination in Southern Religion," appears in WHERE WE STAND: VOICES OF SOUTHERN DISSENT (New South Books, 2004

)):"To see problems and possibilities from the perspective of someone else, whether near or far, requires an act of imagination. The ability to see further than one's own self-interest never comes easily."

The Islam Project

PBS Religion & Ethics Newsweekly's Site of the Month: The Islam Project:

"This multimedia effort is aimed at schools and communities interested in a clearer understanding of Islam. Based on two PBS documentaries (MUSLIMS and MUHAMMAD: LEGACY OF A PROPHET), the Web site features a community engagement campaign, case studies, a facilitator's guide, ideas for dialogue, links to the documentary Web sites, and educational resources for teachers."

The Secret of Happiness

At Bruderhof Communities: "The Secret of Happiness," Fra Giovanni, Letter to a Friend, 1513:

"No heaven can come to us unless our hearts
find rest in today. Take heaven!
No peace lies in the future which is not hidden
in this present instant. Take peace!"

The Moses Myth

At The Bible and Interpretation: "The Moses Myth, Beyond Biblical History," Brian Britt, Associate Professor and Director, Religious Studies Program, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, July, 2004:

"Research on the myth of Moses may not resolve anxieties about whether Moses existed, but it does suggest that across centuries and continents, Moses has retained strong links to written tradition and polemics about group identity."

Rich Fool

Just posted at The Witness, a particularly engaging article, "Possessed by a Thing," Michael Battle:

"In today's gospel, Jesus shows us that we have heavenly worth or we have limited worth. If we choose the former, i.e., heavenly worth, we develop a human character that is incapable of seeing human nature as more than some make it out to be (evil and limited). Jesus helps us see that we are really of infinite worth. If we only choose the latter, limited worth, we develop a human character that is incapable of seeing human nature as other than it really is. Jesus teaches us that if we live in heavenly value then we live in the reality that no earthly object can satisfy us; therefore, no human being should exist as an object but as a subject."

"We learn the essential lesson: do not attempt to possess things, for things cannot really be possessed. Only make sure you are not possessed by them, lest your god change."

Luke 12:13-21

The movie that popped into my head when I read the gospel lesson this morning, is "A Simple Plan". It may have more points of analogy with the story of the two brothers (which of these two did the will of the father?), but there are plenty of points of relevance to this story as well - exploring some of the depths of the pull of materialism, rather than glossing over the top with, "materialism bad, we shouldn't do it" rhetoric. I'm not sure if this movie, or scenes from it, could effectively be used in a worship setting within most congregations, but it is definitely worth the time to see it, as you think about this passage!

For me, it's particularly difficult to present these passages in Luke without becoming so reductionistic as to be meaningless and without preaching to the choir about economic justice in a way that seems shallow and not very helpful for much of anyone. (Except, of course, for ME, because *I'M* the one who gets to express my wisdom about economic theory, justice, and the rest of it!)

I continue to wonder, when I read these passages in Luke, just how much I read them as passages about economics at all. Economics seems to be one place that whatever it is Luke's Jesus is talking about lives itself out - and it might be particularly the case in our own culture. But, I wonder whether economics is the key issue here - the heart of the matter. (I hesitate to read it THAT way, though, because certainly our own economic understandings are unjust and ineffective for the long haul - whether they are conservative or liberal - and I don't want to be accused of not preaching the "prophetic" word here, from either point of view! There are well-meaning, thorough academic studies on all sides of the issues of Jesus and Economics, especially in the gospel of Luke, and I'm not certain that being rhetorically correct within any particular community is worth ignoring some of the complexity of all of that, even as readings within our own culture(s).)

Some readings that interest me this week:

From Paul Nuechterlein's Girardian Reflections on the Lectionary:

"For me, the key insight into the Parable of the Rich Fool is that he talks to himself. His only dialogue partner throughout the parable is himself, until God's voice intervenes with reality. I take it that this isn't just an incidental narrative choice since the man even goes to the rather comic point of formally addressing himself as psyche, 'Soul.'

In mimetic theory, does this represent the extreme consequences of the primary "misrecognition," that is, the self-delusion that our lives are not lived according to the desires of others? We fool ourselves into thinking that we are masters of our own desires, and we act out that ruse by talking to ourselves. But death has the habit of breaking into our self-made plans, and we are reminded that we share the objects of our desire with others: "Whose will they be?" When trapped in such self-dialogue, does it take death to snap us out of it?

Or can our lives be opened to the God who suffered death that we might be offered true life, a life in constant, creative dialogue with others? It is the Life of the God whose life is itself the constant creative dialogue we call the Trinity. Even God doesn't simply talk to God's self. God's life is that of the Father and Son whose creative dialogue is mediated to us by the Holy Spirit."

From "Preaching Peace" by Michael Hardin and Jeff Krantz:

"I cannot think of any more dangerous text to preach on than this. If it is put in the context of our mimetic crises, it is easy to see that certain parties, movements, ideologies, nations and corporations have succumbed to the world view of the rich fool. They plan out a new world order without realizing that history repeats itself. Like the fool, they will be in for a big surprise when history moves through the cycle of mimetic violence until it has found resolution in a scapegoat. Except this time there will be no resolution. The mimetic generative mechanism has been failing for the last several years, there is no world peace. A suitable scapegoat cannot be found. The world is unraveling faster than democracy and freedom can ‘stabilize’ (sic) it. How long do you think we have? How long can the current level of crisis be sustained? At what point of escalation will it become unbalanced? Finally, how do we calculate abundance? Do we see it as our self-right or do we see opportunities to feed others, and thus, feed God (“make ourselves rich before God”)."

From Gregory C. Jenks, advanceWord at Faith Futures Foundation:

"Assuming for the moment that the farmer's spiritual problem was not his remarkable prosperity (which tends to arouse our envy), what exactly was his problem? Was it the assumption that he had life under control? Did this farmer now see himself as master of his own destiny?"

From John J. Pilch, in Saint Louis University's Center for Liturgy studies:

"What should the fool have done? The same anyone else in that position should have done: distribute the surplus to others, immediately. The lucky landowner was in a good position to become a "patron" to select even more clients, or simply to be beneficent. He might have done what Jesus praised the shrewd steward for doing (Luke 16:1-9): using surplus wealth as a means to gain friends so that when the wealth is gone, the friends will remain and repay the kindnesses, as this culture expects."

From Fr. John Foley, also at the Center for Liturgy site:

"If death were coming for you this very night, would you live life differently? Would you try to be “rich in what matters to God.”?"

NT Wright on Resurrection

At Beliefnet: "Your Spirit-Powered Resurrection Body," interview with NT Wright, by Laura Sheahen.

"Christian doctrine teaches that, at the end of time, God will physically raise up human beings. But what will "the resurrection of the body" be like? Anglican bishop N.T. Wright, one of the world's premier New Testament scholars, spoke with Beliefnet recently about the subject--and about his series of accessible Bible commentaries, "Mark for Everyone," "Luke for Everyone," and more."

First Century Synagogues

"The Nature and Origins of the 1st-Century Synagogue," Anders Runesson, The Bible and Interpretation July 2004:

"It is very likely that the institutions referred to as proseuchai in inscriptions dating from 3rd and 2nd century bce Egypt were, in fact, Jewish temples, and not synagogues as is commonly assumed."

Luke 11:1-13

From Girardian Reflections on the Lectionary, by Paul Nuechterlein:

"The talking part of prayer is generally the easier part, however. Our desires -- or what we think we desire -- is usually up-front for us and easy to ask for. It's the listening part that is perhaps more difficult. What is God's answer? Even more pertinent in light of mimetic theory: What is God's desire?"

There's a helpful article on Mediterranean and American Prayer by John J. Pilch, at Saint Louis University's Center for Liturgy site. Pilch reminds us of the patron/client relationship in the Mediterranean world. He writes:

"In general, prayer is a form of communication with someone who is considered to be in charge of life. For most believers, God is in charge of life and everything. Americans, who take pride in their scientific abilities and achievements, have gradually reduced the areas of life of which God is in charge. Only in extreme cases do Americans (turn) to God regarding needs in the economy, health, space conquest, and so on. This is one reason why American believers sometimes find it difficult to pray."

At Preaching Peace, Michael Hardin and Jeff Krantz focus on The Lord's Prayer as a meditation:

"The “petitions” of the Lord’s Prayer are not then petitions in the traditional sense. They are affirmations of a present reality which remains out of sight to those still ensnared in the miasma of mimetic crises. To the one who has died and risen with Christ, all that is needed is given each day, no matter how it may seem to those looking on from outside the wonderful celebration of God’s saving. (See Paul’s description of this in II Corinthians 6!)"

Quoted at Fr. John Bucki, SJ's, Sunday Reflections, at the Center of Concern:

"We are closer to God when we are asking questions than when we think we have the answers." (Rabbi Abraham Heschel)

At Dylan's Lectionary Blog, Sarah Dylan Breuer asks,

"In the days of Jesus, and in the days of Luke, debt was the leading cause of slavery. I suspect that the same could be said of our own day. In Luke, Jesus calls upon his followers to ask God to forgive their sins as we (that's in the plural, the "we") forgive our DEBTORS, those who owe us money. Where would we American Christians be if God answered that prayer? Where would we be if God forgave our sins the way we (collectively, as a nation) forgive debtor nations?"

Sr. Joan Chittister reflects on "Contemplation in the Midst of Chaos," in her message at the Chicago Sunday Evening Club:

"It is not circumstances that make or destroy a life. Anyone who has survived the death of a lover, the loss of a position, the end of a dream, the enmity of a friend knows that. It is the way we live each of the circumstances of life, the humdrum as well as the extraordinary, the daily as well as the defining moments, that determines the quality of our lives. Yet, each of us has the latitude to live life either well or poorly. Ironically enough, it is a matter of decision. And the decision is ours."

Myself, I've been thinking about "correctives" this week: the "other side" of dialectics, which I often forget in my real life, though I'm great at them in my academic abstractions! How does meditation on Jesus' prayer in Luke 11 bring me back to balance and center in Christ? And in what senses am I "already there", and my striving, no matter how nobly- or spiritually-motivated, is counter-productive? What would it mean to meditate on the Lord's Prayer? To live it out in our real-life actions?

Fresh Air Programs

A couple of interesting programs on Fresh Air, July 19, 2004:

John L. Allen on his new book: All The Pope's Men:

"Allen writes for the National Catholic Reporter. He's a Vatican analyst for CNN and NPR, and he writes a weekly Internet column called The Word from Rome. His new book is called, All the Pope's Men: The Inside Story of How the Vatican Really Thinks."

Linguist Geoff Nunberg on 'Values':

"What does it say about electoral politics that "values," formerly a political bromide, is now a battle cry?"