Another Slippery Slope

Many people use the “slippery slope” argument when warning others about what they perceive to be the danger of a certain way of thinking or behaving.

When worship music took a turn toward contemporary styling back in the 60s and early 70s, I heard many pastors preach against “the devil’s music” (it was actually 20 years later in my church circle–that’s how behind the times we were). They claimed that this was the first step down a “slippery slope” that would lead to all sorts of sinful behaviour in churches including drugs, drunkenness and sex amongst the young people. (Obviously, such pastors weren’t aware what was already happening in their youth groups . . . but I digress.)

When the issue of women clergy began to be an issue (and some still believe it is), the slippery slope argument went something like this: “You permit a woman to be in the pulpit and women will get the idea that it’s OK to tell men what to do, they’ll start doing this at home, and the family will experience upheaval and possible disintegration.”

When the Emergent Movement started gaining momentum and receiving attention, preachers like John Piper (among a multitude of others) warned that those who accepted such a theological shift would find themselves on a “slippery slope” that would lead to ultimately denying the existence of God.

Which brings me to today.

The most prevalent argument in conservative circles today is that accepting homosexuality will inevitably lead to a breakdown of morals; legalising gay marriage will surely lead to the breakdown of the family unit. Some take it further and actually name the sins that will follow as we travel down this “slippery slope.”

Bruce Reyes-Chow has made a excellent point on the Patheos blog how that not promoting and legalising equality for LGBTQ people is also a slippery slope, as demonstrated by the recent exploits of now-infamous Pastor Charles L. Worley and his declaration that LGBTQ folk should be locked behind electric fences and kept there until they all die out.

. . . [I]t would be easy to dismiss him as some radical, fringe person that should be given little attention or thought. After all, no reasonable and faithful person would ever think these things, let alone say them.  My friend Eugene Cho, in his excellent post chastising Worley and others, says, “No matter where you stand on the issue of gay marriage, there are some boundaries of human decency that should never be crossed.”

For the most part I agree, most people who think homosexuality is a sin, probably do not think that LGBTQ people should be rounded up until they die off. And then I think back to some meetings/debates among those whom I would consider “thoughtful and faithful” communities in my own denomination, the Presbyterian Church (USA). When it came to homosexuality, the slippery slope argument was always busted out, “homosexuality will lead to … [insert perceived sexual 'deviance'].” After an awkward moment of “Whoa, did he just say what I think he said?” most of us would simply dismiss these folks as fringe, after all, the slippery slope argument is unwinnable — and what does it matter anyway?

And then you hear people like Worley and others who do in fact verbalize what we know already happens, people take anti-LGBTQ thought, theology and rhetoric and walk down that slippery slope to the point of killing people who are gay. I am generally not a slippery slope kind of person, but in this case, I will borrow a page from some of my brothers and sisters in Christ who believe that the affirmation of of homosexuality, as choice or creation, will lead to the destruction of all that is good and holy and say this:

You can wrap your theological position in all the “speaking the truth in love” or “hate the sin, love the sinner” rhetoric you want, but if you hold the idea that affirming homosexuality will lead to the destruction of societal “norms” then you had better claim the other side: anti-homosexuality rhetoric will lead to the death of human beings because they are gay.

He continues:

. . . [T]hose of you who continue to give life and validation to anti-homosexuality thinking must know that you have been given the privilege of being thought of as reasonable and faithful. This protection has given you a false security that your words, no matter how diametrically different they may sound from Worley’s, do not lead to violence.

They do.

(Click here to read the rest of the post.)

I suppose the biggest problem I have with slippery slope arguments is that they tend to be mostly conjecture. We don’t really know where following a certain path will lead because we haven’t yet been down that path. All we have to go on is history.

Has contemporary music in church brought illegal drugs, booze and sex into the sanctuary?

Have women in leadership positions in our churches resulted in the breakdown of families?

Has the Emergent Church been the birthplace of increasing numbers of atheists?

Will granting equality to our LGBTQ family & friends bring about a rise in perversion and the destruction of the family unit?

Based on all information available–and the testimony of history–the answer is and must remain “NO.”

Punography

I had to post this funny piece I received in the email today (Thanks, Danny). I hope it gives you a laugh.

I changed my iPod name to Titanic. It’s syncing now.
Jokes about German sausage are the wurst.
How does Moses make his tea? Hebrews it.
I stayed up all night to see where the sun went. Than it dawned on me.
This girl said she recognized me from the vegetarian club, but I’d never met herbivore.
I’m reading a book about anti-gravity . I can’t put it down.
I did a theatrical performance about puns. It was a play on words.
They told me I had type A blood, but it was a Type- O.
Energizer battery arrested. Charged with battery.
I didn’t like my beard at first. Then it grew on me.
How do you make holy water? Boil the hell out of it!
Did you hear about the cross eyed teacher who lost her job because she couldn’t control her pupils?
When you get a bladder infection, urine trouble.
Broken pencils are pointless.
I tried to catch some fog. I mist.
What do you call a dinosaur with a extensive vocabulary? A thesaurus.
England has no kidney bank, but it does have a Liverpool .
I used to be a banker, but then I lost interest.
I dropped out of communism class because of lousy Marx.
All the toilets in New York’s police stations have been stolen. Police have nothing to go on.
I got a job at a bakery because I kneaded dough.
Haunted French pancakes give me the crepes.
Velcro – what a rip off!
Cartoonist found dead in home. Details are sketchy.
Venison for dinner? Oh deer!
Earthquake in Canberra , obviously the government’s fault.
I used to think I was indecisive, but now I’m not so sure.
Be kind to your dentist. He has fillings, too.

Majesty: Something for the Church to Consider

This reflection from UCC’s StillSpeaking speaks into how many feel about their church experience. I know there are many Sundays when I would prefer to immerse myself in nature than “attend” a church service. It’s certainly something worth thinking about, especially if you are involved in church or worship leadership in any way.

*   *   *   *   *

“The Lord is king, he is robed in majesty.” (from Psalm 93)

“I don’t need church to experience God; I experience God in the mountains and in the ocean.”

Whatever.

Is seeing the Crown Jewels the same as seeing the Queen of England?

The Psalmist says that the natural world is the robe of majesty God wears, a sort of regal outfit she puts on to show how great she is.  There’s nothing wrong with being awed by the outfit, but that’s not the same as worshiping the one who wears it.

On the other hand.

Would people still so eagerly seek God in natural places of majesty while ignoring corporate worship if so many church services weren’t so utterly devoid of majesty?  Because, you know, we don’t get to complain about the mountains and the oceans if they’re more eloquent on the subject of God’s greatness than we are.

Organists and musicians, do you play every piece, even the giant old German hymns, like a funeral?

Scripture readers and liturgists, are you unrehearsed and unprepared (and therefore unsupported by the clergy that recruited you), and so do you read the most important words in the world in a flat, halting, deathly boring tone?

Clergy, do you schlump around up in the chancel like an affable host inviting people to play a parlor game?  Do you sound apologetic and embarrassed when forced to talk about God’s awesomeness?

Everybody, have you felt even the slightest twinge of awe in your church lately?

If not, the mountains win again.

God, you are great.  Fill your churches with your Spirit so that all who enter might experience your majesty.  And if even then we’re still blowing it, then meet me in the mountains, OK?  Amen.

(Reflection by Quinn G. Caldwell, from StillSpeaking)

A Mother’s Song

When I was little, my mum used to sing to me.

Her voice wasn’t awesome. In fact, she often would start in one key and, gradually, through the course of the song, move to several other keys. When I was visiting her recently, we were talking about her funeral and she suggested that my sister and I sing Dottie Rambo’s  “Mama’s Teaching Angels How to Sing.” (Perhaps God will, after all, inflict the ultimate irony  . .)

But mum, while certainly not an award-winning singer, passed on to me through her songs truth that stuck with me. Even now, 40+ years on, I see how seeds of faith were planted by the repetition of a handful of her favourite hymns.

Like this one:

All the way my Saviour leads me,
What have I to ask beside?
Can I doubt his tender mercy,
Who through life has been my guide?
Heavenly peace, divinest comnfort,
Here by faith in him to dwell;
For I know, whate’er befall me,
Jesus doeth all things well.

(Fanny J. Crosby)

And this one–her most favourite, which has failed to make it into most hymnals:

O thou, my soul, bless God the Lord,
And all that in me is
Be lifted up, His holy name
To magnify and bless.

Bless, O my soul, the Lord thy God,
And not forgetful be
Of all his gracious benefits
He hath bestowed on thee.

Bless the Lord! Bless the Lord!
Bless the Lord, Oh my soul,
And all that is within me
Bless His holy name.

(Scotish Psalter, 1650)

From my mother’s songs, I learned about faith in God and the faithfulness shown to us, God’s love, peace and the hope we have. I learned so much about God but the greatest lesson I learned in my mother’s singing was hat God can be trusted to keep his promises.

Mothers, never underestimate the power of a song sung to your children. Even when they’re only 2 or 3 years old, the words–and the love and conviction with which you sing it–will carry on far longer than you will ever know.

Non-Dual Consciousness

“The lowest level of consciousness is entirely dualistic (win/lose)—reproduction, me versus the world, and basic survival. Many, I am afraid, never move beyond this. The higher levels of consciousness are more and more able to deal with contradictions, paradoxes, and all Mystery. This is spiritual maturity. At the higher levels, we can teach things like compassion, mercy, forgiveness, selflessness, even love of enemies. Any good contemplative practice quickly greases the wheels of the mind toward non-dual consciousness. This is exactly why saints can overlook offenses and love enemies! We must be honest enough to admit that this has not characterized most Christian clergy or laity up to now. It is not really their fault; no one taught them how to pray, even in seminaries.” – Richard Rohr, Contemplation AND Action: An Informal Session with Interns (CD)

The Bible as a Marketing Tool

A few weeks ago, I spoke at Northside Bible Church in Perth, a small, independent, and somewhat conservative church in the northern suburbs, whose pastor is my dad (hence the invitation). They have deliberately chosen the name “Bible Church” to express their primary focus, and use the Bible as the centre of all they do (and the King James version too!)

In my meanderings through various fundamentalist circles, especially in the southern United States, I have found the Bible used extensively in the advertising material for a variety of churches. From the roadside billboards to church signs and promotional material, pictures of the Bible and Bible-related slogans feature prominently. I’ve included a few here.

At one stage in American history, using the Bible as a marketing tool would have been a recommended strategy since the Bible commanded respect and was a sign of integrity, honesty and truth. In our present culture, the Bible no longer holds the same prestigious position as it once did (one can argue that it never has been revered to the same degree in Australia). Thus, it seems to me, that use of the Word of God as a promotional tool only serves the purpose of attracting the converted–or, at least, those who respect the Bible–to your church.

You may argue that it is not the Bible that has lost respect, but those who preach and claim to follow its precepts who have lost credibility. This may be true, yet, in my daily dealings with students and their families, I have seen firsthand the attitude towards the Bible and attest to the fact that the Bible has largely lost its place of honour and is now just another religious book. Even among the religious, those who use the Bible are seen as fanatics and fringe-dwellers.

To the outsider–the unitiated–slogans, clichés and advertising which feature the Bible–will be at the best seen as irrelevant. It really appeals only to those initiated ones, who hear the phrase or see the picture, and nod in agreement, “Yep, that’s what we’re about!”

It makes me wonder for whom is the church advertising? Does it really want just more of the same? Or is there a larger vision–a more holistic view–which should be seen as its centre? I’d be interested in reading your thoughts.

Under Attack?

Last week there was a major development at the University from which I graduated–a student was expelled for watching the ‘morally reprehensible’ TV show Glee on his computer, off-campus, at Starbucks. This wasn’t the only thing that led to his expulsion, but it was the ‘straw that broke the camel’s back’ so to speak. However, the list of offenses for the preceding months was just as ludicrous. Keep in mind we are talking about a ultra-conservative, Christian University.

People may argue whether or not the University was right or wrong to expel him, knowing that he signed a statement saying he would abide by the University rules when he enrolled. But the fact is that he organised a student protest last year against the University for allowing a pastor who had covered up and mishandled a case of the rape of one of those in his care to serve on their board. The protest did not draw a huge participation by the students, possibly because they feared the would become targets for harassment or possible expulsion. It did, however, draw extensive media coverage including some of the national networks in the U.S.

Now, after the College has taken this step, and people, organisations and the news media are once again scrutinising the University, those who support the College are posting on Facebook and Twitter comments which ask for prayer because the University is experiencing “an attack of Satan.”

So let me get this straight: You know this is an “attack of Satan” because…? Are you good at recognising these so-called attacks? Do you get them often? Could you be mistaking them for what happens when institutions do dumb things–could it be that what the University is experiencing is the result of its own actions? Is it possible that they are being seen by people outside of its “hallowed halls” as being arrogant, ignorant, and antiquated? (On arrogance, how arrogant is it to think that the Prince of Darkness would leave whatever ghastly, horrible torture he is afflicting somewhere else to personally attend to thwarting your righteous and holy activity?) Could it possibly be that it is the University which is being the evildoer by harassing, intimidating and provoking fear in its students?

Time will tell.

In my opinion, student numbers will drop somewhat as the media and blogosphere publish their take. I would be surprised to see much coverage nationally due to the way the media has gotten used to the lunatic-like activity of fundamentalists, but it will provide fodder for the tabloids and comedians as well as discussion topics for the disenfranchised ex-fundies. In the long run, such actions will hurt the College and it will lose any status it may have in the community as a credible educational institution.

Meanwhile, I am looking forward to seeing a Glee episode that has the expulsion of a student from a fundamentalist Christian school as its storyline.