New Worship?

Anyone who knows me will know I love this band. I have loved them even more over the past couple of years.
Over a number of posts I would like to put forward an idea that may not sit well with some. I would like to review a number of songs, by this band and others, and see how they blend, (in my mind anyway) with the drive, the groan, the desire for things like justice, siding with the oppressed, resisting the oppressor, uplifting the downtrodden, peace and hope that I believe Jesus intended in the story his life told.
Along with this I would like to place these songs into the arena as worship songs. Songs that may not immediately or comfortably fit the conventional idea of worship songs as seen in church today but fit other criteria that were present in Jesus' life. Criteria that I believe have been sorely overlooked throughout the history of what we have come to know as Christianity.
As a precursor I would point to some of the attributes of Jesus' life that tend to be ignored or played down in order to keep the 'Western' image of conservative Christianity.

1. He was born a fugitive on the run. A king with an army behind him wanted His blood in the earliest days of His childhood.

2. During his most formative years, those spent teaching and expressing the Kingdom of God, he spent homeless.

3. He was hated by those in authority because his ideas threatened the very fabric of that authority. Some of His ideas taken literally would turn all forms of governance and domination on their head.

4. His teachings of the Kingdom of God and their ramifications are some of the most dangerous and subversive ideas put to print.

5. In some of his teachings he purposely placed himself in the shoes of the downtrodden, the lowly, the poor and those in prison to expressly have his followers treat them with love and respect.

6. His one act of violence was against his own people in a literal overturning of those with money and power.

7. His death was symbolic of the removal of power structures and ideas expressed on earth and their replacement by the subversive ideas of the Kingdom of God. A dangerous story told and retold by the ritual of communion.

With these ideas in mind I would like to portray these songs as anthems that provoke. Songs that force us to think and struggle with the world around us. Songs that move us out of apathy to engage injustice, poverty, violence and remind us of the downtrodden.

So let our first song in this series rip!

The song is called "Wake Up" by the band Rage Against The Machine.
Some may fondly remember it as the parting anthem of the movie The Matrix (a movie that deserves a post of it's own).
Just a few words about the music: It's hard edged guitar is a really driving and groaning sound. Good for getting that @rse of a pew! This song also has a wailing guitar at the beginning and end. It's kind of like a siren alerting one out of a stupor, an affect Rage use in a number of their songs.

Here's some selected lyrics:

C'mon!
Standing with the fury that they had in 66

Fist in the air in the land of hypocrisy,

Movements, come and movements go

the puppets, the police, the judges, the feds

20 20 visions and murals with metaphors

They gave the power to the have nots
and then came the shot

Whado I Whado I have to do to wake up
to break the culture up, to break the structure up

I think I heard a shot!
Wake Up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How long not long
'cause what you reap is what you sow!

Of course this song is using US politics in the 60's as a driver pointing out names like King and Malcolm X and implicating the US Government and FBI but on a deeper level I believe it speaks against any authority using oppression. Telling those that sit idly by in a silent majority that just sitting there is an act of acceptance. In our world that often means blindly consuming or hopelessly believing that injustice cannot be faced or addressed due to an overwhelming status quo.
I believe this song is a driver to get us motivated and out of that pessimistic mentality.
Let's listen and WAKE UP!

Leviticus = Whips and Chains.

I was roaming around on Facebook (Crackbook?) today and found a controversial little group that could be joined: Lets start with just 1,000 people to support Gay Marriage in Australia.

Intrigued I had to take a look at the forum and found the obligatory post from the Fundy Right perspective. You can imagine the run of the mill anti gay banter going on - peppered with 'justifying' scriptures. (Genesis 1:26-27, 9:6). (Romans 1:24-27). (Genesis 2:22-24). (Hebrews 13:4).

At the end of this rant theres the obligatory, loveless I know you better than yourself spiel. You'll love this:

If you are homosexual, we encourage you to look deep inside yourself. Are you joyful and happy? Look at your anatomy, what do you see? This is who you are created to be! There is help, just a prayer away. Acknowledge your situation, confess it, and turn to Jesus. He is there. Secure support from others who have been in your situation and have escaped the lifestyle.

Excuse me while I blow some chunks
*Insert Pavement Pizza Sounds here*.

I was ready to stop reading there but I found this gem of a reply:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.

Absolute Gold!
I can't top it!
Can you tell I love sarcasm?

Justified.....?

Folks I'm a little worried, a little disenchanted. Apparently I have it wrong. I should be justified when I want to support my country and it's Government as it sets policies that condone war. Apparently it is condoned even by God to invade foreign sovereign countries in the name of "they started it!"

It must be true. A soldier who fought on the ground in one of those foreign countries said so.

This is what he said:
I am a Special Forces Officer and veteran of combat in Afghanistan.

The 6th Commandment of the Christian Bible (and Jewish Torah) is "Thou Shall Not Kill" or "Thou Shall Not Murder" depending on the translation of ancient Hebrew.

I prefer the "Thou Shall Not Murder" as it is the more accurate translation.

I would like to stop it there a moment and mention the convenience of the alteration in interpretation of just one word from "Kill" to "Murder" and the implications of that.
Removal of the word kill which is a blanketing word that encompasses all forms of violence against another causing death leaves no real room for movement and we can't exclude warfare that causes death and begin our justification of that.
Murder is a legal word in our current English language and according to most Western legal systems one must have intended beyond a reasonable doubt to have taken another's life. There are reasonable defenses to the charge - the main being self defense or defense of another under serious threat from the person killed.
So the implications here are that one "is justified" in killing another with some specific conditions.

Let's hear some more:

Becoming a Christian is not a suicide pact. It does not mean that now as I am a Christian that anyone can come and beat me or kill me, rape women in my house and take anything you want from me and I will not fight back. That I will just lay there as a slug (or run away) because of my religion.

Interesting first sentence because Jesus has called many to serve him who have died in his name many quite violently as is attested by the accounts of Christian martyrs through history. I bring to the fore a recent martyr's (Dietrich Bonhoeffer) prophetic words regarding this "when Christ calls a man he bids him come and die."

The rest of this paragraph paints a noble, male supremist picture and builds with it a narrative of the 'enemy that is not in my home' which conveniently slots into that wider narrative of 'the enemy that is not in my country or doesn't follow my superior belief system'.

Let's go on:

Defending yourself is not murder. This is very clear in the Bible.

Also, "Thou Shall Not Murder" ties in completely when Jesus was asked what he thought was the greatest of the 10 Commandments

Matthew 22:37-40 -- Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

And Jesus also said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." (Luke 6:31; Luke 10:27 (affirming of Moses) and Matthew 7:12)

If I saw "bad men" breaking into my neighbor's house, I would go and defend my neighbor. I would willingly put my life in danger to prevent my neighbor from getting murdered, raped or beaten. That is also the way I would want my neighbor to treat me. I would be a coward and a very bad neighbor if I knew bad men were killing my neighbor and raping his wife and I did nothing. I would be evil if I justified "doing nothing" because I am a Christian.

I am still scratching my head at the twist of logic here. The scriptures are plainly pointing me in a direction and clearly telling me how to treat my neighbour and how to situate myself in relation to God.
The scenario after the scriptures is going back to the White Night narrative we saw earlier where he is identifying an enemy 'bad men' (obviously pigeon holing a type of person) putting them on a different level to his 'good' neighbour that most likely shares his values and beliefs. He then goes on to paint an unlikely picture that nowhere near fits into the wider scenario he is attempting to justify. Lets not kid ourselves he is attempting to fit this narrative into the invasion of both Iraq and Afghanistan.
If my neighbour America is such a good neighbour I would be expecting that he would not invade me and my home. I would expect that he would consult me on who is and isn't my enemy. I would ask him to assist me in restraining my enemy instead of thrusting his superior beliefs on me and tearing my loved ones and home apart in a vendetta against his self made enemies.

There's more:

What makes murder inherently wrong is not that it feels wrong, but that a transcendent Creator to whom we are answerable commands: "Thou shalt not murder." What makes kindness to others inherently right is not that human reason says so, but that God does: "Love thy neighbor as thyself; I am the Lord."

This doesn't do much for the argument. I would just say that an inner conscience would reflect the Creator's commands of though shalt not kill and usher us toward kindness.

As far as being a soldier in the American Army. The American Army and the American solider does not invade countries for money or booty or for power (as most armies do). We go (and fight and die) in hard places around this brutal world to liberate people and to bring freedom. This is what good neighbors do. I would leave the American Army if we invaded Iraq just to kill or Iraqis or invaded Afghanistan to take all their gold and make them slaves.

We were attacked on 9-11. 3,000 American died. More Americans will die if the terrorists are not confronted. We either go after them or surrender to them. Again, being a Christian or a Christian nation is not a suicide pact. It does not mean you just lay there and let people do whatever evil they want to you without fighting back.

Self defense is not immoral - not by an individual or by a nation.

God sent David to slay Goliath. Did God break his own Commandment?

Just the way I see it.

Best Regards,

The first paragraph reads like a narrative of one who is working against their conscience and needs to somehow justify the actions of their country. I am glad that many are beginning to see America for what it is and the motives behind it's Government's policies. Every aspect that this soldier says that America doesn't do, IT DOES DO!
I don't want to play down the fact that American and other country's soldiers don't go into difficult, horrific situations overseas. They do an extremely hard job under difficult circumstances and often die for that cause.
What I do want to question and oppose is the idea that the soldiers in these places need to be where they are and specifically doing what they are doing. Driven by questionable policies that are in place for the profit of a few and the detriment of many.
I would also question the automatic notion that Terrorists will flourish if not confronted. If internal American and Western policies were to shift away from accelerated corporate gain at the expense of neighbouring countries I don't believe these minority groups would have a reason to attack us.

But hey that's just the way I see it!

Fading.....

I have been reaching back into my metal music archives after recently hearing the latest album from Metallica. This new album is harking back to older familiar sounds of theirs.
As always I'm drawn back to old favorites when I hear the familiar sound and could not help listening to one of their more impacting and enduring tracks - Fade to Black.
Its theme fits well with recent news covering the health and wellbeing of the twenty somethings in our (better? superior? functional? capitalistic)society.
I also remember vividly the church's line on such music. As you can imagine it was not all that well received or accepted.
Inadvertently this line on such music effectively separated church people from these 'sorts'. Hmmm another thing I don't agree with church about. Never mind I would probably find those 'sorts' more accepting, more realistic regarding life's issues and easier to talk to than most church people anyway.
So as I listen again to the words and great music of this song I am reminded of those living on the fringe. Those that are out of most people's sight but never God's. And I ask myself the question...what makes this song so moving, so enduring and so relevant to those on the fringe? I'll let you make up your own mind on that one.
Also as I listen I remember the younger brother of a good friend of mine who used to listen to all this and other great music with us when we were younger. My friend although distant still remains but his younger brother found solace at the end of a rope barely into his twenties. It brings home the grim reality.

Have a listen and as you do have a thought for the kids mentioned in the article:

ONE sixth of Australians aged 23-24 suffer depression or anxiety.

ONE sixth engage in anti-social behaviour.

ONE fifth use marijuana, other illegal drugs, or are regular binge drinkers.

ONE fifth have a long-term physical or mental health problem.

Overall, 40 per cent showed severe signs of problems including depression, anxiety, antisocial behaviour or illegal drug-taking.

The study also found that alcohol use increased markedly for many in their mid-20s - most particularly among moderate drinkers.

I'm having trouble putting the video here i'll post it on my facebook for you

Good Dog - Bad Dog

I am recently reminded, by stories in the papers and blogland, about a story or parable I have heard repeated many a time in evangelical churches. You may know it... the one about the good dog and the bad dog inside us all. Pointing to the capacity of good and evil within the heart of everyone. The line that the church preaches on this subject is simply: The dominant dog will be the one that you feed the most. i.e if you feed bad dog most it will dominate. If you feed good dog most then the good dog will dominate.
Recently after rethinking most things church, I began to think about the idea of the starving dog. This viewpoint seems to be grossly overlooked by the simple feed the good dog or feed the bad dog line.
A starved dog if you have ever seen one is as you could imagine a very formidable beast. Getting more and more nasty the hungrier it becomes. Not necessarily weaker as the Church viewpoint suggests but more dangerous and difficult to deal with.
So following this idea through and applying it to the heart I am wondering if this church line is a healthy one. Does it clearly portray the human heart for what it is? Does it allow for the hearts capacity for evil or does it try to deny it? Does it portray a false idea that all evil can be expelled from the heart by our own action?
I suggest that this simplistic line of thinking is denying the reality of the heart and its impulses toward evil, even for the most 'good' or 'Godly' person. I also suggest that the more a person denies these impulses within themselves the more susceptible they become to such impulses.
So by continually pushing a simple line of: starving the evil dog within; are churches unwittingly forming a culture of denial. A dangerous denial for the capacity for evil and thereby turning a blind eye to it. Much like dropping ones guard, or dropping the armour as portrayed vividly in Romans.
When I read recently about Mike Guglielmucci and his very public and shameful fall from a high place in Australia's AOG ministry. I guess I should not be surprised. I believe the system of church has pushed a small group of hierachy into such an unrealisic pressured lifestyle of perfectionism and 'Godliness' that those chosen few come to a point of desperation that they would do anything to maintain the facade. Under this light the unthinkable acts like: faking disease and; forming a facade of supernatural healing, become understandable and remind me that they are human afterall. I feel that I would be more connected to Mike now that he's 'back on Earth' with us rather than previously when he was cramped into a supernatural and unrealistic lifestyle. A life that he had to lie about just to keep up the lofty expectencies of those around him.
The real shame of all this is that really good people with the best of intentions are continually eaten up by these systems. It's this (church) system that I despise most. I don't think Jesus' idea for his Church looked anything remotely like the systems we have in place these days.
Thank Christ there are movements and leanings to alternatives!

Embracing Ambiguities

Yes its been a while since I posted last.
I've been stewing a little.
Stewing on a couple of books I've been reading.
A thinking man's assault on the Christian Right in America
and another on the "New Athiests"
And more recently appreciating a story of an obscure songwriter and poet Bob DYLAN as portrayed by 6 different characters in a recent biopic.
Interestingly enough both books and the film have a similar undercurrent of wisdom pertaining to the ambiguities, the uncertainties, the mysteries that life throw at us.
Late in his book I Don't Believe in Atheists, Chris Hedges makes a very good point about these ambiguities and throws light on them pointing out the book of Ecclesiastes where the author Koheleth saw the pathetic, vain projects we spend a lifetime constructing. Warning man that "all the deeds that are done under the sun; all is vanity and chasing after wind. Nothing is certain or permanent, nothing real or unreal. Koheleth points out that "all things are wearisome, the eye is not satisfied with seeing nor the ear with hearing." "What has been is what will be and what has been done is what will be done." The King that asked God for wisdom and got what he asked for (Solomon) reinforced these points with his own life and the story it told.
Koheleth goes on "what is crooked cannot be made straight and what is lacking cannot be counted." Ecclesiastes points out that it is not so much what we do in life but what we do with what life hands us. We have limited real choices. We carry our human flaws to the grave. Our attempts to become Godlike by denying the emptiness, rythms and cycles of life are vanity. The best we can do is endure with compassion, wisdom and humility and accept the ambiguity and ultimate mystery of existence.
In the film I'm not there the caricature of Dylan played by Kate Blanchette sitting in an old style black taxi driving through city streets answering questions put to him/her?? by an inquiring journalist makes the same point. "the music is full of mysteries." "There are contradictions."

Chris Hedges argues in both books the dangerous practices professed by two differing ideologies (Christian fundamentalism and New Atheism). The expression of fundamentalist certainty. Ideas portrayed by a selected portion of humanity instituting a moral superiority and the omnipotence of human reason. Practices that become dangerous when non believers or the non enlightened are made separate and placed on a lower plateau. The natural progression of this is to suppress the alternate ideas of the lesser, the lower, the unenlightened and when they won't be silenced...use force or more commonly use the more accepted method of drowning them in a sea of irrelevance and obscurity.
The first step of both ideologies is to ignore the ambiguity. To formulate a faith of certainty. Where followers are absolutely right and all outsiders are not. A powerful motivator when you think about it. Tapping into a person's primal drive for control and certainty when facing questions of mortality, spirituality and the supernatural.
Another danger posed by these ideologies is the tendency to externalise evil. Placing emphasis on the perceived evil of the non believing outsiders while ignoring the reality of an internal struggle that takes place in the human heart. The believer of either ideology falling prey to self righteousness.

Another sobering point that Hedges explores is the deadening effect of visual distraction (i.e. TV, internet, video gaming etc) on the Western Capitalist Psyche. He draws an interesting idea from Niel Postman (Author: Amusing Ourselves to Death) contrasting George Orwell's 1984 and Aldous Huxley's Brave New World.

"What Orwell feared were those who would ban books, what Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who would want to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would be a captive society. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture preoccupied with some equivalent of positive feelings, pornographic delusions and an egocentrically generated utopia. In 1984 people are controlled by inflicting pain. In A Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared what we love will ruin us."

With that I'll be off to deaden myself on the PS2 shortly!

Here's a clip of Kate's Dylan performance. The section I'm talking about is in the last 2 minutes. I recommend you check out the full feature.

I Never Signed Up To Be Superman...

It has been some time since I have attended my usual place of worship. I love the people there and it's relatively easy to be accepted there... just turn up on a regular basis with your mask on.

For a little background this church lends itself to labels like: evangelical, fundamental, spirit filled and the main banner of apostolic.

I know I'm going to sound very cynical here but some things need saying.

I was a little unsettled about six months ago in the congregation when a pastor was invited to the front to testify regarding a dream and vision that he had. My ears immediately pricked up because it was a first in the six or so months that I had been going along. The vision was simply of Jesus staggering toward him in a pleading manner with both hands plastered and bandaged. The interpretation of the pastor about that vision was a simplistic idea of the church being recently tied down financially due to the ongoing works on the building.

Once I heard the interpretation my mind was immediately flooded with other problems of hierarchical problems with the clergy there, it's lack of impact on the community, particularly the poor and other minority groups.

My thoughts didn't have much time to develop though when the senior pastor chimed in and gave his interpretation siting recent threats made by some unknown Muslim group toward him due to his public support of a Ps. Danny Naliah. (This pastor had over the previous year been fighting in Victorian Courts for the right to speak 'freely' and accuse Muslims of trying to make Australia an Islamic State and brand them all dangerous. The pastor lost the court case but vowed to continue his public preaching and defamation regardless. ) As soon as this interpretation was said the whole congregation gasped. That gasp was enough to say it all... without a word being said. These Muslim Terrorists are out to get us! Threatening to attack our Pastor!

Needless to say I was choking silently looking around the huge hall in disbelief.

The second choking incident came via a friend who used to be a part of the church. I began wondering why I had not heard from a prominent female pastor who in the past had preached regularly but I hadn't heard of for some time; and I mean hadn't even sighted there for some time. My presumption was that they were on holiday because no one even made a mention of them. When I say them I mean the husband as well who was also a Pastor there and just happened to be the Senior Pastor's own son. Well my friend in the know told me that there had been a falling out between father and son. Son who was a chippy and plasterer by trade had put in a huge amount of time on the ongoing renovations to the church complex. I guess he expected to be put into a senior role in the church along with his wife as his father intended to retire in a short time. Expectations fell short when that role was handed to a prominent young super Pastor who had charged through the ranks and obviously did the spiritual hard yards. It was around this time I was being introduced to alternative concepts of doing church without dominant hierachy and minus most of the politics. It was and still is very appealing. So now I had a few new words in the vocabulary and could brand it the dualistic induced power struggle
that it was.

Meanwhile as all this was going on the Super Pastor was in full flight. Letting us know in one fully fledged sermon that Jesus the man was not poor at all. He was the son of the father who has the 'cattle on a thousand hills'. He wore an extremely expensive garment and other similar arguments. Letting us know (inadvertently) that it's okay to be rich in our already rich society even if our neighbours and our neighbours in other countries experience horrendous poverty. I found that problems in his sermons came up not in what he said but what was inferred and left unsaid.

As I kept going I felt like I just didn't belong. I didn't cut it. I wasn't enthusiastic at 'worship' time. I thought more and more differently than the people there. I found myself picking the eyes out of sermons and disagreeing more and more. I was beginning to roll my eyes at the never ending stream of Super Speakers visiting the church. Each with their super plan to follow: what I needed to be all that I could be in Christ. Along with their super testimony of how they were saved from whichever huge pit that they found themselves in and how they were powering on. Letting me know loud and clear (again inferred) how I wasn't being all that I could be and not powering on at all. I began to look around to see if there were any folks like me. On the fringes, not with the 'in crowd'. I found they came and went sporadically (like I was) and I never had opportunity to connect.

Mostly I was beginning to become disenchanted. I could see more and more of the picture this church was painting of Jesus. It was beginning to look exactly like the one at the top of this post. A super Jesus that expects some sort of plastic perfection from me. A need to be rich, powerful, desirable, beautiful etc. in order to be accepted. It just doesn't wash anymore. It smells more like empire than the Jesus I know.

I never signed up to be Superman.