Christian Faith in the Age of Refugees

What I truly don’t understand is why so many who call themselves Christians are reacting with such fear towards the refugees. Even though I don’t agree, I can understand why Christians are against SSM or “socialism” by the gov’t. I get that the Bible can be interpreted in ways to support those views. However, to me, there is no question at all on how we’re to treat refugees. None. And beyond that, if we do indeed serve a God who “casts out fear” and who “triumphs over evil” and to whom we’re to give up all in order to serve Him, then how can any Christian not help these obviously very hungry, thirsty and homeless? Or at the very least, recognize we should and understand that our faith may be too weak to actually do so boldly. But to try and say we shouldn’t?? I can’t wrap my mind—or my heart--around it.

I can understand if politicians, from a purely political viewpoint, want to close our borders to all. I can’t understand the politicians who say to do that in the name of Christianity.

Of those on FB and of my friends who have shown a viewpoint on the refugees, there are Christians, Jews, atheists, “nones” and at least one Pagan who has shown compassion and a welcoming spirit to the refugees, and isn’t driven by fear. Every friend who I’ve come in contact on this who is vehemently opposed to allowing refugees in, is a conservative Christian.  Every. Single. One.

Why is there such fear by Christians?? Is God not who we think He is? He is so weak? I feel like I’m barely hanging on as a Christian—and the only way I can possibly can continue to do so, is to  believe that God truly is the God of love, grace and compassion—and power—that I believe Him to be. If I were to try and believe in this little God who would drive me to buys guns to protect myself, reject friends/family who are gay, and slam the door in the face of the needy, then I will walk away. I already have actually. That God is not my God.

"...how do you connect gay marriage and your Christian convictions?"

(From a "note" I wrote in Facebook a while back....)

A FB friend just sent me this msg, and I decided to respond publicly because maybe others are thinking the same thing: “I saw your profile pic. I'm interested how you connect gay marriage and your Christian convictions.”

OK. First off, I believe “marriage” should be separate from “civil unions”—so two people can be joined legally and two people can be joined spiritually/Biblically/religiously as a separate thing. They may or may not coincide. Christians could still get married in a church, before God, and view it as a sacrament if they so choose, but they’d also have the “legal” aspect to their union for purpose of taxes, inheritance, medical visitation, children, etc. As a society, we’d make laws about the civil union side (no close relatives, no minors, only 2  people, etc) and the church and other religious groups would made decisions about their own unions that they bless. However, since we’re not there as a society, I don’t understand why we’d take one religion’s supposed definition of marriage and apply that to our laws. So, thru’ that pragmatic lens, I support same-sex marriage.

Now as far as my “Christian convictions” go, they all boil down to one thing: God is love. He defines love, embodies love, is the center of love and His son Jesus in love incarnate. Of course, there are a lot of other Christian beliefs and doctrine and so on that I subscribe to, but as Jesus Himself said, “The greatest of these is love.” And I believe God’s main message to us, His creation, is that of love, tied in with grace and redemption. And to me, that’s why I support gay marriage as a Christian too. I don’t see anything in the Bible that clearly condemns gay marriage. The handful of verses that refer to homosexual acts, when you view with the correct cultural and situational context and with correct views of the language of the time at most leave God’s view of homosexuality in general unknown. He seems to condemn some homosexual acts that are more about prostitution, violence, orgies, inhospitality and/or power, but you can’t extrapolate from that all the way to condemnation of a gay person or God’s outright forbidding of gay marriage.

So, back to love. Two of the most committed, loving, amazing parents I know are gay. They’ve adopted four children, 3 of whom were siblings and came into their home with some fairly significant “baggage.” They’ve opened their hearts and their lives to these children and are providing them with the love and support they so desperately need—and deserve. I don’t for ONE SECOND think that God is anything but pleased to see their love. And if those two parents want to get married (legally), who am I to stand in their way? Who am I to say that can’t? My Christian convictions absolutely inform my decision to stand with them and celebrate their love and their commitment.

There you have it.

Closed on Christmas??

So....I heard that my church has cancelled services on Christmas this year, being that Christmas falls on a Sunday and all. I posted a entry on Facebook about it which resulted in some good discussion which made me want to explore this more and thus--my first post in 18 months or so!

Apparently in 2005 when Christmas last fell on a Sunday, several mega-churches decided to eschew services on Christmas Day, as did our church (a definitely non-mega-church, with about 200 in attendance on an average Sunday.) I assume many churches, of all sizes, also cancelled services in 2005.

Now, in 2011, Christmas is on Sunday again and my first reaction was that church services at our church shouldn't be cancelled. I mean, isn't Christmas supposed to be about Christ and celebrating His birth and what better place to do so than church?

Or, is there a better place? Or a better time than Christmas Day, the December 25 date having more pagan roots than Christian ones, if truth be told? What's the big deal about going to church on that day, or any given Sunday, for that matter? Why should we expect anyone to work on Christmas? Think of the needed infrastructure of typical mega-church: multiple services on Christmas Eve, their enormous staffs of not just ministers but of parking lot attendants and custodians and nursery workers--maybe even double-overtime comes in to play if someone has to work on a Sunday AND a holiday. I don't know the inner-workings of a mega-church. (Actually, I don't think I want….) But shouldn’t a church, of all organizations, tell their staff "no need to work on Christmas Day" and spend time with your family instead?

I guess I don't really know why some churches cancel their services. Is it indeed because it’s too much to ask of the staff? (One of my FB friends whose husband is a music minister stated that they have 4 Christmas Eve services and 3 on Christmas Day, and yes I would agree it's way too much to expect any one person to be at all of those). Or, is it because not enough people will attend services to make it worth their while? That opening Santa's presents with the kids takes precedence on Christmas morning over attending—or leading--services?

Our church has a Christmas Eve service, usually at 5:00 PM. I haven't been to it in years since we usually host Christmas Eve dinner at our house for the relatives. Last year my family went, but I stayed home, since someone (me) has to take the turkey out of the oven. Often, none of us go and instead, spend time with out-of-town family members. I wonder if I'm being a hypocrite--I stay home Christmas Eve due to the responsibilities of hosting a big family dinner. Is that different than staying home Christmas morning if it falls on a Sunday? Or is this not about any one person’s specific schedule or family traditions but about what the church offers its congregants and community and the message it sends by having services, or not?

Some background: I go to church. My family goes. We're regulars. In fact, our kids are some of the few in our church who have nearly perfect attendance in Sunday school. My husband and I tithe. We serve on committees and lead this or teach that or help out here and there. We Are Involved In The Church. But I would never for a second credit what “good church-goers” we are with our level of faith or the strength of our relationship with God. They're related, I suppose. But, truth be known, I probably get more spiritually out of some blog entries I read than I do attending a typical Sunday morning service. (Shout out to Jamie The Very Worst Missionary here and her amazing blog as an example.)

So why does my family go to church? The answers are legion: for community, as a way to connect with other believers, because it's our tradition, for worship, for teaching, habit, for what we Christians like to call "fellowship." All of these things enter in, I suppose.

But I can't say I haven't questioned this habit of ours. Lately, in fact, many Christians are and while mega-churches still are growing (I believe), a funny little thing called home churches are also exploding in growth--where people come together and worship and learn about God without all the trappings of a typical church. Where their tithe can go directly to ministries and outreach and justice rather than a significant portion going to church building maintenance and insurance and heating bills. Where the church truly is a committed community of believers and seekers yearning to know God in a more intimate setting. I can't say there's not an appeal in that.

I read a book a while back called Pagan Christianity, which explores how almost everything that we consider to be "church" has roots, not in the New Testament church or Christ's teachings, but in pagan habits and traditions. Preachers, music, church buildings, Sunday school--you name it. It's a startling and fascinating read and can't help but make one question this thing we call "church" and its relevancy today.

Maybe that's what I'm getting at in this post. Is the church relevant today? Do we as Christians actually need “church”? And if we do (and I’d probably argue that church is indeed a good thing), then why make it less relevant by cancelling services on one of our most significant and holy holidays? If we don’t need church, then maybe it’s time to re-think this huge organizational entity we’ve established.

If we’re cancelling because the overhead and the staffing is just too burdensome, maybe we need to look at the model of a church that requires such enormous infrastructure. Maybe a church can get too big. If it’s because we know many of our congregants won’t show up, then why aren’t we cancelling church on the weekends of July 4th or Labor Day or any other typically sparsely attended Sunday?

Maybe I’m over thinking this. Maybe it’s not that big of a deal. Go to church or not on Sunday. Go to church or not on Christmas. have a service. Don't have a service. Does it even matter? Should it?

Bells Are Ringing--make them stop, please!

OK. Curmudgeon warning ahead!

Just letting you know that a rant will be happening. One that I'm slightly nervous about posting lest I get branded a scrooge or a cheapskate. But, regardless, here goes.

Can we please get rid of the Salvation Army bellringers!! Augh! Nothing against SA per se. I haven't done research into them, but overall, they seem to provide good services and I hope they're doing so efficiently and being good stewards of their money, but the ringing--it's got to stop!!

Every flipping time we go near a store for weeks on end, those incessant ringers are there. Could they find a more annoying bell? Really? If they tried? I don't think so. So, first off, I'm already slightly annoyed since I'm doing grocery shopping or running errands and am always in a hurry. The bell just grates on my nerves and makes me crabbier by the second. Then, there's the pang of guilt because 99 out of 100 times I don't put money into the pot. Well, OK, make that 100. I don't want to encourage the bell ringer method of fundraising. At all. I could have just written a check for hundreds of dollars to poor blind starving orphans but since the ringers don't know that, they just see me as someone too rushed and crabby to show a little mercy and grace.

Which is true. I am. Too busy. Too annoyed. Too crabby. Not to give in general, but to give to them in that manner. Paul and I give to numerous causes both worldwide and local. We're pretty dang generous if I do say so myself. But I won't give to the SA bell ringers. I just want them to go away. Silent night--and day--where are you??

What is Christmas about anyway?

From this video, produced by James Dobson's CitizenLink divison, you'd think Christmas was about buying buying buying. The folks over at Focus on the Family seem to take great pleasure in being outraged that "Christmas" is being mentioned less and less in retailers' greetings, catalogs and ads. In fact, we Christians are supposed to find these so-called "efforts to secularize Christmas offensive."

Watch the video now.

Me? I tend to be of the thought that Christmas is about the birth of Christ, about God's gift to humanity, about worshipping a God who has literally walked among us. While we certainly celebrate Christmas in our family by doing traditional things like exchanging gifts, baking cookies and decorating a tree, I have never for a moment tried to define this holiday by what I hear and see at the mall or on the catalogs I get. But apparently Stuart Shepherd who does these "StopLight" videos (remember: he was the same guy who did the "Would it be wrong to pray for rain at the Democratic National Convention?") defines Christmas differently than I do.

Apparently getting outraged that retailers (whose customer base goes beyond just Christians, believe it or not) use a generic holiday greeting rather than "Christmas" is enough reason to be offended and boycott businesses. (yes, there's an actual list .) Personally I get more riled up about fair trade, labor practices and treatment of employees and factory workers in developing countries and so on. But those wise people over at Focus on the Family are obviously the ones who we need to turn to for our "moral compass" and "values." Because if you value celebrating the birth of Christ, what better way than to make sure that Target is saying "Christmas" and not "Holiday"?

How do they do it?

Imagine my surprise when I got up this morning, looked out the window at least 8 inches of snow and noticed my Sunday Oregonian lying in the driveway! I'm starting to think Santa came early and dropped the paper from his sleigh. I don't know how else the paper got to my house in the southwest hills.

School was cancelled every day this week, the garbage and recycling trucks never came but somehow the newspaper delivery and mail carriers still make it! While I don't want anyone risking their lives in order to make sure I can enjoy my paper and read my mail while I'm all cosy and snug in my house, I do send big kudos and a big thank you to them. You are appreciated!

And it does make me wonder what's up with the garbage trucks anyway? We're supposed to get our garbage picked up Thursday morning and now it's Sunday and its still here. Maybe the Oregonian and the USPS can give some lessons to the garbage collection companies about service?

To be shot or not

I rarely get flu shots for my kids. They're currently ages 6, 4 and 4. The last time we got the shots was maybe three years ago when there was that big shortage and that's all your heard about. You know, since we thought we maybe couldn't get them, we wanted them all the more!

But overall, I just hesitate and I wasn't quite sure why. Then, just last Tuesday, I made the decision to definitely get my kids in for their shots. Until I went to my book group annual dinner out and fellow booklover Tracy said it was her goal every year to convince at least one person to forgo getting the shots! She thinks they're not all that effective and it's mainly a ploy for the drug companies to make more money. I did a little research and found this article where this doctor, Donald W. Miller, states:

The CDC’s 15-member Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) makes recommendations each year on who should be vaccinated. Ten years ago, for the 1999–2000 season, the committee recommended that people over age 65 and children with medical conditions have a flu shot. Seventy-four million people were vaccinated.

Next season (2000–01) the committee lowered the age for universal vaccination from 65 to 50 years old, adding 41 million people to the list.

For the 2002–03 season, the ACIP added healthy children 6 months to 23 months old, and for 2004–05, children up to 5 years old.

For the 2008–09 season the committee has advised that healthy children 6 months to 18 years old have a flu shot each year. Its recommendations for influenza vaccination now covers 256 million Americans – 84 percent of the U.S. population. Only healthy people ages 19–49 not involved in some aspect of health care remain exempt. Pharmaceutical companies have made $146 million influenza vaccines for the U.S. market this flu season.
Almost all the ACIP members who make these recommendations have financial ties to the vaccine industry. The CDC therefore must grant each member a conflict-of-interest waiver."[emphasis mine]

Wow. Does make you kinda wonder--is this about staying healthy? Or creating a nice profit?

I'd love feedback. And, just to be clear, just because I'm not a gung-ho flu shot advocate, that view doesn't extend into regular vaccinations. I absolutely believe in immunizations and all my kids are up-to-date on their required shots. This is about the flu and only the flu.