I'm excerpting without permission a passage from Ken Wilson's Jesus-Brand Spirituality. If Pastor Wilson or his publisher want me to take this down, I will. The reason I share this is because it's about a dear friend of mine. I'm not interested in profiting from this website, or this post, and I hope it encourages people to buy the book and read it. So here goes:

The young man who leads our Friday night visits with homeless friends in Ann Arbor taught me a lot about how worldviews shape perceptions and experiences. Eric's father is an atheist. Eric's own atheism was therefore learned and not some passionate reaction against the excesses of religion. He grew up with little interest in or exposure to religion, all of which makes his experience especially instructive.

Eric was a "Deadhead," having attended more than fifty Grateful Dead concerts. Not to stereotype, but Eric during this time smoked a lot of marijuana. He describes living for years in a cloud of the stuff. He stopped smoking marijuana for about a week and during that week became curious about God; he even asked out loud, "God, are you there?" No response. Shortly thereafter, he realized he wouldn't make much headway getting a new job until he cleared his system again for the inevitable drug test.

After this background, Eric told me of a vivid spiritual experience. "Around that time," he said, "I started getting curious about God again. Then one day, I heard a voice say, I'm here."

Eric instantly understood this as the answer to the question he asked years earlier: "God, are you there?"

When Eric recounted hearing I'm here, he pointed, ever so slightly with his finger, away from his body. He then described how those two words changed his life. He felt that the main message of Christianity, Jesus, was true. He decided to start living as though that were the case. He swore off marijuana and has been drug-free ever since (a matter of years now). His life took on a much clearer focus and sense of purpose. He essentially hopped right onto the path of Jesus brand spirituality.

I asked him, "When you say, 'God said, I'm here,' what was the hearing experience like? An inner voice?"

"Yes," Eric replied, though his eyes said otherwise. So I pressed him.

"All right," he said. "I say it was an inner voice, so people don't think I'm crazy. Actually it felt like it came from right next to me."

Bingo. Eric grew up with a worldview that in some important respects is closer to the ancient worldview than the one in the process of receding or undergoing a major adjustment. Before these recent shifts took place, the modern worldview said, "What you see is what you get. Everything material is predictable, and with enough information we'll be able to squeeze all the mystery out of it. There is no God in heaven, because we've been up there, and no God was sighted."

But Eric grew up watching Star Trek, the television series that introduced popular culture to the new physics that began with Einstein. He knew all about space-time bending, multiple dimensions, wormholes, and quantum uncertainty from Star Trek. So when Eric heard, I'm here, as though from a space right next to him, he had the worldview to allow such a perception to land and take hold.

And take hold it did. You should have seen Eric in action the other Friday night leading the homeless ministry. He was their pastor. He was a breath of fresh God-air to those homeless people who love him because he so obviously loves them. One of the homeless men claims Eric prayed for his injured eye and his eye got better right away; the man reported that he stopped pickling himself in alcohol since then without even intending to. (no one is claiming any instant healing, just the possibility of a touch from God through Eric.)

Thank you for letting me share Pastor Wilson's thoughts on my friend.

If you read Brad Ruggle's blog, you've read about TOMS Shoes. If you have yet to hear about them, let me give you a brief idea of what they do.

Since its beginning in May 2006, TOMS has given over 10,000 pairs of shoes to children in Argentina and 50,000 pairs in South Africa through the purchases of our caring customers. In 2008 TOMS plans to give 200,000 pairs of shoes to children in need around the world.

Our ongoing community events and Shoe Drops allow TOMS supporters and enthusiasts to be a part of this One for One movement...

For every pair you purchase, TOMS will give a pair of shoes to a child in need.

---

For my birthday, Giles bought me a pair of TOMS shoes as well as a t-shirt, both of which mean a One for One donation is made. I'm geeked! I suspect I'll be wearing them every moment that I am able.

But I'm losing my religion. No, not really. I have, however, been growing further and further apart from the modernist teachings that have crept into parts of Christianity. "Haha," you say, "tell me something I don't know. You've been hating on things that seem 'new' for years on your stupid blog."

Okay, you caught me. When it comes to theology, I tend to be orthodox, maybe a bit patristic even (but I'm no Marty). I've been reading a bit of the pre-Augustine writers from the church, guys that all seem to rail against war and militarism. Which is interesting considering the popularist Christian politics of my lifetime.

I'm convinced, however, that pacifism and nonviolence aren't radical or weird, but quite Christian. Tertullian, Justin Martyr, Hippolytus, Origen, etc were all quite blunt about being anti-war in order to be Christian. And by blunt I mean "a soldier of the civil authority must be taught not to kill men and to refuse to do so if he is commanded, and to refuse to take an oath. If he is unwilling to compy, he must be rejected for baptism..." (Hippolytus). That's a slap in the face.

I'm curious what others think about this. Marty, please comment.

the Rev. Jim Wallis on the God's Politics blog:

But one other thing bothered me last night, and it did also at the Democratic Convention. It was all those signs that read "Country First" and all those chants of "USA, USA, USA!!" The high-powered and, frankly, militaristic rhetoric kept telling us that "country" should be put above everything else -- including family and friendship. But what about faith? Should country be put ahead of faith, too? I kept wanting to yell back at the people yelling at me about putting the country first and say, "No, not me, I'm a Christian." Because we as Christians simply can't put our country first, ahead of God, ahead of Jesus Christ, ahead of the body of Christ (remember the worldwide body of Christ), and even family and friendship. Especially when our country is wrong, and when most of the rest of the body of Christ around the world thinks so.

(emphasis mine)

In a post today on their blog, the Cato Institute, a libertarian "non-profit public research foundation" (their words, not mine), contends that things aren't as bad as they seem with the US economy and poverty. Citing a new report from the US Census Bureau, Cato contends:

It flies in the face of reality to argue that the major indicators of economic well being in America are trending downward in some sort of crisis that demands sweeping government intervention.

The looks at several different categories of people and statistics, primarily income and poverty. In the words of Steve at The Austrian Economists, the Cato report concludes the following:

Bottom line: the middle class is shrinking because it's getting richer, median household income is up, the poverty rate is the same as 2006 and lower than 1997, and the number of Americans without health insurance is down slightly from 2006 and lower than it was a decade ago.

Steve and the Cato Institute seem to leave out one spectacularly important piece of the equation: the individual.

They observe that since 2006, only 12.5% of American live below the poverty line, which is better than the 13.3% that did so in 1997. However, the report says that during the period from 2001-2003, "Nearly one-third of the population had at least one spell of poverty lasting 2 or more months during the 3-year period from 2001 to 2003." Yet they suggest this report is "spoiling the pity party" held by those they view as opponents of limited government. This doesn't take into effect how much the cost of living has gone up (consider gas price increases since 2000).

As someone would like to see limited government, I am irritated by the crass elitism thrown around. It's easy to shrug off 12.5% of the American population if you've never gone without health insurance. If you have never had to live check to check and deal with having your utilities turned off because you don't have the money to pay the bills, then it is no stretch to shrug off the nearly one-third of people who have had to deal with poverty for 2 months or more during a 3-year period. Two months or more of poverty!

I suppose some of what I have written makes me sounds like those about whom Cato says "Their solution is always to restrict trade and immigration and launch expensive new programs to alleviate the obvious misery."

I don't wish to restrict immigration. I don't want to launch expensive new programs. But I do know what it is like to lose your job. I do know what it is like to go without health insurance for a long time (years, not days). I also have a big TV, a nice car, and eat out a few times each month, so I am aware that my wife and I aren't hovering below the poverty line either.

Still, it's calloused and immoral to shrug off things as getting better while 30 million or so people suffer to make ends meet. There is clearly a lack of Christian love and justice coming from the Cato Institute and its friends. Maybe they should start there.

People love categories. Think about election polls. How are people categorized?

- African-Americans

- Hispanics

- Soccer Moms

- Catholics

- Swing Voters

- Evangelicals

Uh, okay. Thanks, categorizers.

I mention this in light of the fact that I've been really considering how I vote and how politics and faith relate for me, as a Christian. Interesting to me has been the back-and-forth regarding evangelical Christians and their votes. According to CNN:

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll taken July 27-29 showed that among white, born-again or evangelical voters, 67 percent are for McCain, with 24 percent for Obama.

Although it's a strong showing for McCain, he's lagging 11 percentage points behind President Bush in the 2004 election. Exit polls show that Bush beat Sen. John Kerry 78 percent to 21 percent among these voters.

Pew confirms this information, giving McCain a 68-24 advantage over Senator Obama. As I have tried to digest all of this and put my own Christian and political leanings into sync, I first have had to define "evangelical" and figure out how I fit under that definition.

According to the recently released Evangelical Manifesto, evangelical is defined as the following:

Evangelicals are Christians who define themselves, their faith, and their lives according to the Good News of Jesus of Nazareth. (Evangelical comes from the Greek word for good news, or gospel.) Believing that the Gospel of Jesus is God's good news for the whole world, we affirm with the Apostle Paul that we are "not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation." Contrary to widespread misunderstanding today, we Evangelicals should be defined theologically, and not politically, socially, or culturally.

To me, this seems like a very generic definition of "Christian," but sticking with this definition defines me as an Evangelical too.

Either way, I have seen that the 20th century American Protestant Christian approach to politics is being rejected in whole or part by many who I grew up with or around. In the evangelical political sphere that I grew up around, there was no part-timers, meaning that political leaders with us or against us, cut and dry. In today's political landscape, it seems that they've taken more of a "best we can get" approach.

The 2007 Dr. James Dobson "I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances" has now become the 2008 "the possibility is there that I might [endorse McCain]." Some evangelical leaders met in July to agree to support McCain, saying "The only evangelicals that [Obama's] going to win over are those who have never read the Bible."

Which seems a bit ridiculous considering the words of someone like Pastor Joel Hunter.

I'm not going to beat any drum here, especially considering that I really don't think I'm an Evangelical (capital 'e') but trying to be more of an orthodox Christian instead. That being said, it'd be nice to see some more consistency from the Christian leadership in America that attacks inconsistencies in political voting records.

Food for thought this Sunday afternoon.

My hometown paper, the Traverse City (MI) Record-Eagle, has made a few changes since the last time I lived there (2002 or so). One of their big changes since then has been to introduce a columnist who tracks and writes on local and regional gas prices. The worst part of this is how they advertise the column. Check it out:

Seriously?

Thanks to Micah, I just read an interview with Joel Hunter on Beliefnet. He speaks at length of his experience being an evangelical Christian and being consulted by the Obama campaign on abortion policy. It's well worth the read here.

I've been speaking with the likes of Dion and others lately about the prophetic voice. I have been putting it more in context with poverty, homelessness, etc. but I found this quote in an article regarding Detroit's mayor:

"I believe that there comes a time when we as religious leaders have to speak with our prophetic voice, even to powers that be, and say what needs to be said." - the Rev. Edgar Vann, Second Ebenezer Church

Full article at the Free Press here.

Great thoughts from Reclaiming the Mission about church planting and ministry in America:

Church in post-Christendom therefore is nothing less than a chosen way of life. It is choosing a way of being together. This way of being together encompasses how we worship, how we share and eat food, how we pool together resourses to help the poor, how we get together and hear Scriptures read and teach our children how to listen for God in that. Forgiveness, patience, care, speaking truth in love, is part of this way of being together. In this way of living, career and making money is more about taking care of one another and giving glory to God than personal aspiration. And God inhabits this way of being so that miracles, blessings, sustaining times in life and death become a part of everyday life. Mission becomes our rhythym. (sp)

I find it ironic how statements like these, while reflecting a post-modern, post-Christendom thought, truly are a historic, early Christian idea. "Choosing a way of being together." Acts chapter 2 shows how the early Christians did this, "And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved."

It's no secret that the Ancient Future idea, pushed by the likes of Webber, is more prevalent than many understand. A rediscovery of the liturgy, the daily office, and other early church practices being combined with more modern forms of worship is birthing a whole new generation of missional Christians. I just hope that more are less concerned about building a successful church and more concerned about building the Kingdom of God.