Emily Dickinson - Poem 1487

The Savior must have been
A docile Gentleman—
To come so far so cold a Day
For little Fellowmen—

The Road to Bethlehem
Since He and I were Boys
Was leveled, but for that 'twould be
A rugged Billion Miles—

Another Reason To Buy Bob Dylan's Christmas In The Heart

From an interview he did with the North American Street Newspaper Association last week in support of Christmas In The Heart. The entire interview is very much worth reading, but for our purposes, the clear highlight is:

Interviewer: You really give a heroic performance of O’ LITTLE TOWN OF BETHLEHEM. The way you do it reminds me a little of an Irish rebel song. There’s something almost defiant in the way you sing, “The hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight.” I don’t want to put you on the spot, but you sure deliver that song like a true believer.

Dylan: Well, I am a true believer.

p.s. This morning Mardecortesbaja began their track-by-track breakdown of the record. Great stuff!

November Playlist

Pretty heavy on the classic rock this time. Happy belated Thanksgiving:

1. Heroes And Villains - The Beach Boys
2. Just Another Whistle Stop - The Band
3. Caribbean Wind - Bob Dylan
4. The Cross - Prince
5. Space Age Mom - Damien Jurado
6. Apple Of My Eye - Badfinger
7. Everytime I Itch I Wind Up Scratching You - Glen Campbell
8. Better Things - The Kinks
9. September Gurls - Big Star
10. Love Is The Law - The Seahorses
11. I Want Love - Elton John
12. Glorious Day - Embrace
13. Rue The Day - The Walkmen
14. God's Comic - Elvis Costello
15. The Mercy Seat - Johnny Cash
16. There Is A Kingdom - Nick Cave
17. Love Reign O'er Me - The Who
18. Farmer's Daughter - Fleetwood Mac

Bonus Track:

The dreams of Winston Churchill

[In 1932, at the age of 58,] Winston Churchill's dreams, he tells his family, are often of his father who died prophesying Winston would be a failure (from Manchester's "The Last Lion").

Technoviking: for those times when Chuck Norris just isn't enough.

'...there is a time to dance.' (Ecclesiasties 3:4)

Wait for it...things get interesting about 40 sec into the clip...it just gets weirder from there.

[And yes, he will be attending the 2010 Mockingbird conference.]

Exclusive Interview: Mark Galli of Christianity Today (pt. 2)

Last week we posted part 1 of Mockingbird’s exclusive interview with Mark Galli, Senior Managing Editor of Christianity Today. Galli’s experience—from local pastor, to magazine editor, to columnist, to author—has all reflected and informed his passion for a cross-centered, true-to-life articulation of the Gospel. Part 2 of the interview explores Galli’s view on transformation in the Christian life, the place of spiritual disciplines, and the future of Evangelicalism. Enjoy!

Mockingbird: Earlier you pointed out the tendency among Evangelicals towards activism, an “addiction to the horizontal.” As someone who’s been in the Evangelical world for a long time, do you see connections between the current activism (for example, in the Emergent Church movement) and earlier similar movements (like the Jesus people in the 1960s and 1970s)?

Well, certainly emergent folks like to think of themselves as breaking away from Evangelicalism, but there’s so much about their movement that’s just a new chapter of an old book. And actually, not even a new chapter, but a repeat of a lot of evangelical characterizations.

For example, first of all there’s the rejection of the establishment (which in their case is Evangelicalism) and second there’s this notion that somehow they can create a fresh a way of doing church that is somehow more biblical or authentic (which is another Evangelical assumption about the world), and third, that they’re very activist, that they’re going to go out and change the world. Now in this case, they’re not interested in evangelism as much as they’re interested social justice. But it’s very much about getting their hands dirty in the world, and doing something for Jesus. So in that regard, the emergent movement is very Evangelical. And of course, they’d be shocked and appalled to hear that, but that’s my take on their movement.

Unfortunately, the leaders of the emergent movement have pushed that envelope so far that I really can’t tell much difference between what they’re doing and nineteenth century liberalism, which led to dismal results, as far as I’m concerned, for the life of the church. I’d be happy to have a conversation with them about that.

As far as the contrast with the 1960s and 1970s, you do see this youthful idealism that says, first, there are things that are seriously wrong with the church and with Christianity as it is understood today; and second, we can do something about it.

Now, it seems to me that if a younger generation isn’t feeling those things there’s something seriously wrong with that generation. I don’t want to discourage younger Evangelicals from shaking their fists in anger at the sins of the church and their passion to want to make a difference.

What I’m concerned about of course, is the hubris that sometimes comes with that. It can make it all about us, and our reformation and our ability to make a change in the world, instead of pointing us to a couple of other realities. And the first of those realities, what we have to remember, is that the moribund, horrible, sinful, selfish, hypocritical, televangelist church, the one who is co-opted by technology and growth and all these things we find despicable is the church that Jesus died for. And it is the church that Jesus is so committed to that he is willing to have his name associated with it, with that church, with that group of people who we all find disgusting and frustrating and aggravating and hypocritical and so nominal.

Earlier you mentioned the current Christian buzzword, “transformation”; another big one now is “discipleship.” We see these emphases in the wider Christian subculture, and again, in parts of the Emergent Church movement. One Emergent pastor I’ve read has said “the gospel is not that Jesus died for your sins, but that God wants you to help him transform the world.” How do you understand transformation for Christians?

We have to maintain a realistic sense of what we mean when we talk about changing things and transforming things: what is it that we can accomplish this side of the kingdom and what can’t we. Because of course, if you enter into the fray with these grandiose notions that you’re going to be able to transform the whole world and your own church, you’re going to run into brick wall after brick wall after brick wall because of original sin. And you’re going to either do one of two things: you’ll either imagine you’re making a difference when you’re really not, just to self-justify your efforts; or you’re going to become so discouraged that you’re going to give up altogether. And neither of those are Christian responses: one is hypocrisy and one is despair.

But the Christian always lives by hope, even in the most miserable of situations. Because he lives by Grace, he doesn’t live by his achievements, or his successes. He lives by the call of God on his life. So in that regard, back to your earlier question, this generation is like the generation of the 1960s, very idealistic, very passionate, very activist—but I’d like to bring in this emphasis on grace and humility back to the center.

What place is there for things that we call spiritual disciplines and what do they look like? It seems that the standard program in Evangelicalism is read your Bible more, pray more, journal more, get some accountability and you’ll get better. And you have said in your articles that often people don’t get better, at least not in the way we think, and the more we focus on our problems, the worse they get. How would you respond to the cry for spiritual disciplines? What’s a healthy way to think about that?

In light of the new thinking I’ve been doing recently, I’m having to rethink how I understand that. But I think the way I’d approach it now, the spiritual disciplines are at some level means of grace. God knows that we are weak and foolish and hard-hearted people. And he not only condescends to become human for us, but he uses elements of his creation in order to teach us about who he really is and what our relationship with him really is like. So spiritual disciplines are more about God’s means of helping us grasp what the Gospel is really all about and how he in fact does transform us. But what’s happened to a lot of the spiritual discipline language is that it not about teaching us who God is and how he shapes us, but it’s about getting transformed. It becomes about us.

One of Dallas Willard’s earlier works talks about the “spirit of the disciplines,” understanding how God changes lives. And there’s an emphasis that these are classic disciplines that have grown up in the church as a result of the leading of the Holy Spirit that have been instrumental—used by the Holy Spirit—to shape us.

But nowadays, you read books on spiritual formation with titles like "Spiritual Disciplines: Practices that Transform Us" and "Arranging our Lives for Spiritual Transformation." They’re all about us. And that’s where the emphasis has gone askew in the spiritual discipline world. Jesus, of course, talked about prayer and fasting, and was a regular attender of the synagogue (so he obviously attended worship, he listened to preaching and the reading of scripture). So all these are means by which a person is shaped and formed by God. But that is the point. And they will in fact have that affect. They will shape us and change us. If they don’t, something is fundamentally wrong. But that isn’t why we enter into them or what they’re about when we start them. It’s more about trying to enter into a human work/activity—prayer, Eucharist, preaching, Bible study—that opens us to the wonders of God’s grace.

I heard a sermon once where the preacher said that we need to clear things out of our lives, so that God can come in. And I said “Wait a second, if God wants to come in, He can.”

Exactly. He comes in people’s lives that are pretty darn cluttered.

I don’t think St. Paul cleared the road for Jesus to convert him. But often among Christians we talk about spiritual disciplines as if we are the only actors. But in reality, God is much more interested in your heart and soul than you are, and is probably already doing lots of things that you may or may not be aware of. He is disciplining you spiritually apart from anything you do.

Right. The very fact that you even have any desire to do spiritual disciplines might be a prompting of the Spirit in the first place. You’re not offering something up on your own initiative.
One example might be fasting. People talk about fasting in the terms you’ve talked about—clearing out space in our lives for God to enter in. For me, fasting is a physical parable that reminds me of how much of my life is focused on things that are non-God. Which is probably why I don’t do it very often. Fasting is something that always brings me to my knees in repentance. If it opens me up to God, it’s only because I recognize that I’m a person who’s not very open to God. And I think that’s true of all the disciplines on some level.

Last question: what are the bright spots in the Evangelical world? When you think about the future, what encourages you or gives you hope in light of all the muddled theology out there (a lot of which is pretty depressing)?

Well, I do think the neo-Calvinist movement is a hopeful sign. Everyone, when they talk about what young people are into these days, they’re always pointing to the radical emergent crowd. But when you actually look at the number of young twenty-something people who are actually going to church, or going to conferences, and giving their money to things, a huge number are in the Reformed crowd. I think they’re hungry to hear the message of the sovereignty of God, the prevenience of Grace. All the classical Christian understanding of the world. And the Reformed are really good at making that point. And they’re doing it really well right now.

The problem with a lot of the neo-Reformed movement is that they turn Grace—and you read some of the blogs, etc.—they turn Grace into a new Law. And they’re very judgmental and very critical of people who don’t talk about the Gospel in exactly terms they think it should be talked about. And they’re very quick to judge and to cast people off into outer darkness. This is the great weakness of the Neo-Reformed movement, as I can see it. But I nonetheless still think it’s a hopeful sign because it puts the emphasis on the right place: that it’s about God, first and foremost.

The other thing that’s a helpful movement, but could move in one of two directions, is the Ancient-Future movement. When people are trying to draw on the resources of Church historic, especially the early church fathers, and the church tradition that’s found in Catholic and Orthodox (and Anglican) circles, I think that is helpful, as long as it’s not being turned into a new traditional-ism, or it’s turned into a new religion. But drawing on the theological and ecclesial resources that the Church has offered us, that God has given to the church through the ages, has the potential to bring the Evangelical movement a more even keel and a breadth and a depth that could help sustain it in the decades ahead.

Of course, that’s just speaking on human level about two movements I tend to have some hope for. But in fact, in the end I really don’t care if Evangelicalism survives or not, as we know it today. God cares about Evangelicalism as he cares about the nations of the world—they’re a drop in the bucket. He doesn’t need Evangelicalism to further his cause in the world. And if Evangelicalism were to disappear tomorrow, we shouldn’t lose much sleep about it.

But the fact of the matter is that God in history has continued to raise up some group, somehow, somewhere that speaks out the truth of the Gospel in a way that is not only truthful but actually makes a difference in people’s lives. There were no evangelicals in 1500, but then God raised up Luther and John Calvin to remind us of that. There were no Evangelicals per se in 1700 but Whitefield and Wesley came along and started the preaching that led to the Great Awakening.

So the greatest hope I have for the future is what Evangelicals have traditionally stood for—the preaching of the Gospel. I have great hope in that, because God will not desert his church. How will that look? I have no idea. Will evangelicalism fragment? It may. I don’t think it will necessarily, but if it does, God will raise up something else.

Leo Tolstoy's "The Forged Coupon"

Christianity uniquely believes in the power of love and forgiveness to free captive sinners from the bonds of sin and death. Consequently the law (quid-pro-quo justice, conditional love, and punishment) does not fix the problem, but only makes matters worse. But is not the law necessary sometimes? Aren’t there times when justice must be served? For Tolstoy, the answer must be an unequivocal NO! In “The Forged Coupon” - the last novella he ever wrote- Tolstoy challenges the basic assumption that there is a realm of God’s creation where the power of grace is excluded and justice, punishment, and law are needed to restrain evil in the world. Grace must “work” in every situation or else there is no real hope for the future of the world.

The first half of the book begins with a father who refuses to grant his son an advance on his allowance to pay a debt. The son forges a coupon (interest bond) to pay his friend what he owes. This simple indiscretion sets in motion a series of escalating evils that seems to have no end. Those who are wronged seek revenge. Those who steal are imprisoned. Those who are imprisoned become murders. Family men become vagabonds and merchants become crooks. Each character acts in accordance with what’s best for them while each wrongdoing is met with the just penalty for that transgression. In all cases, the use of justice hinders the miserable offender and makes matters worse. This is a picture of the world without love. A place where evil escalates without abatement to the ruin of everyone involved.

In the midst of this world that is falling apart at the seams Tolstoy introduces Mariya Semenovna, an older widow with a small yearly pension. She begins what amounts to a reversal of the evil and misfortune of the first half of the book. Mariya lives a simple life of love for her neighbors. She gives jobs to the lame, food to the poor and shelter to the sojourner. Her tireless service is never repaid with either gratitude or compensation, yet she continues to live solely for the benefit of others. When asked why she lives so selflessly for others, Mariya simply pointed to the Gospel of Matthew and the Sermon on the Mount. But the climax of the book happens when Mariya meets the serial killer Stepan. He steals from her and she does not fight him, but submits himself to his trespass. With her last breath, she forgives Stepan and pities how wretched he had become. After the murder, Stepan becomes overwhelmingly sleepy and cannot fully flee from the crime scene. On the third day he rises up from the ditch he fell in and immediately confesses to the closest police officer. He has become a shell of his former self. He began to preach the faith of the one he had killed.

The second half of the book is marked by the spread of the teachings of Jesus and the reversal of the evils perpetuated in the fist half of the book. God is not distant from the world, but is to be found within the horizontal interactions of individuals, enabling them to love and serve. Stepan becomes an evangelist to his fellow inmates. He readily accepts the punishment of death, but when this act converts the local executioner, the region is unable to carryout capital punishments. A former thief is released from prison and now gives all of what he has to the shop owner who had previously cheated him. When a rich landowner is killed, the Christian wife refuses to press charges and demands the release of the murderer. In the end, the boy who originally forged the coupon reconciled with his unyielding father. In each case the individual is shown grace in the midst of their unworthiness and are told of Jesus’ teaching. Where death had previously conquered, now love is the only remedy.

For Tolstoy, the world is in constant battle between the wages of sin and the greater power of love. The law is not necessary to keep the world from spinning off its axis- its existence is a given. Instead it is the law itself that pushes the world toward destruction. It is the grace of God moving people in love for service of one another that holds destruction at bay. Love works in every instance to eclipse the power of sin. In short, love makes the world go round.

Happy Fun Time + Getting it Together.

I've been spending way too much time on youtube today and was going back through some old videos on my favorite list. Thought I'd pass this one along. I saw it at a Lutheran Youth conference a couple years ago and it is an AMAZING illustration of the Christian life. For further reading check out the Internet Monk's post on Required Reading - Behavior Modification and the Gospel (HT JH).

Enjoy

The American Music Awards, Mickey Rourke, and the Thirst for Glory

A couple of nights ago I watched the American Music Awards with my wife, and we were struck by all of the "comeback" stories in the entertainment world. Michael Jackson was up for 5 awards including Artist of the Year. He didn't win that one, but he did win a bunch of others. His sister Janet opened up the show with a performance honoring him, which is kind of a "comeback" in and of itself. Eminem, who recently returned to recording after years of debilitating drug addiction, was up for Rap Album of the Year, which he did not win, but he did give an amazing performance. Jennifer Lopez performed her first single after two years hiatus. Rhianna returned to the stage after a year's absence due to being badly beaten by her boyfriend, Chris Brown. And finally, there was Whitney Houston. I remember slow dancing with girls at junior high dances to Whitney singing I Will Always Love You. Well, she’s back, and she won the International Artist Award. Like Eminem, she returned to recording after years of addiction and financial strife and has found huge success around the world.

That's just the music industry. What about movies? Mickey Rourke returned to form in The Wrestler and received numerous awards at the beginning of the year. Robert Downey, Jr., though he never lost his talent, had faded into obscurity for a while, but now he's on top of the movie world with box office success after box office success. Personally, I cannot wait for Sherlock Holmes to come out this Christmas! It's going to be amazing.

All of these examples make this year seem like one big story of redemption, but last night's show got me thinking. On the surface, it was really nice to see such amazing talents be back in the limelight once again. I was really happy for them. After years of ridicule and pain they were able to do what they do best, and we, the audience, got to enjoy it. We were celebrating the return to glory for these artists, but what about all those years they spent on the “C list” or in a drunken stupor somewhere? We didn't give a rip about them when they were struggling and suffering. If anything we gloried in their failure.

Mickey Rourke highlighted this fact early this year when he thanked his dog for being the only one that stood with him through all of the hard times in his career. He even wept because his

dog had just passed away a couple of weeks earlier, and it was his only true friend. It was heartbreaking and honest. He exposed the harsh reality that we are only truly interested in success, strength, and glory. I had the same thoughts watching the AMAs Sunday night. We were celebrating their return to glory, but we had no sympathy for them when they were struggling. This put their messages into context. Whitney sang a song about her inner-strength, and she had to be strong because we don't like weak. Jermaine Jackson, who accepted the awards for his brother Michael, had to proclaim Michael's message that people are inherently good because we don't like the idea of evil or bad people.

What appeared to be a celebration of redemption was only so on the most superficial of levels. It actually proved to be a return to denial. It made me feel good to see them succeed instead of fail because that is what I want to believe is true about me. I don't want to see the harsh reality of Whitney's, Mickey's, Robert's, Eminem's, and Michael's drug problems because it reminds me of my dark places, my struggles. Whenever I do see their failures I instantly compare myself to them in order to self-justify. At least I'm not throwing all of my talent away on drugs like ________. We hate weakness. We want it to be the exception. We want to deny it. Sing to us about our strength and goodness and love. Get yourself together then we can have a good time. Don't admit weakness. Don't acknowledge the obvious. Don't talk about Michael dying anorexic with a stomach full of pills. Don't talk about your addiction and losing millions of dollars, Whitney. Don't be like Mickey Rourke. Don't remind us of how we weren't there for you. Tell us about glory.

This glory that they have achieved, that we all look up to and desire offers nothing in the end. In fact, it brings about the breakdown, and we’ll find a way to glory in that too. One day we celebrate them and the next they are on the cover of our tabloids for us to ridicule and judge. We exploit their pain to make us feel better about ourselves. I can’t tell you how many times I would read headlines about Michael or Britney and think to myself (and sometimes even say out loud), “They are so screwed up.” It made me feel better that I didn’t blow millions of dollars or hang my baby out the window or go driving with my baby on my lap, etc. We punish them for letting us down to the point where they either have to reach the top again like so many the other night at the AMAs or they have to die for us to value them again. It reminds me of another story when a man was hailed as King one week and then crucified the next all by the same group of people.

I think that most celebrities know that they'll work hard to get back to the top only to fall again. It causes the drug habits because even the most successful of us are coping with the inability to repeat, maintain, or achieve perfection and glory. We need to be saved from our thirst for glory.

Martin Luther said it best in the Heidelberg Disputation: The thirst for glory is not ended by satisfying it but rather by extinguishing it.

P.S. For a great interview about glory and failure in sports with Anglican Scholar and Theologian Ashley Null go here.

From the New Yorker: What we Think God is Like

Jesus in Matthew 6 (the Sermon on the Mount):

"Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?

And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you?

Mockingbirds of the World Unite

Along the lines of our recent interview with Mark Galli, I've been encouraged by the discovery of a few more "voice(s) crying in the wilderness." Over at everyone's favorite evangelical-catholic magazine, First Things, I ran into this article by Jared C. Wilson of the blog: gospeldrivenchurch. I highly recommend the whole article, Dude, Where's my Gospel. Here is the opening:

Gospel deficiency is the major crisis of the evangelical church. The good news has been replaced by many things, most often a therapeutic, self-help approach to biblical application. The result is a Church that, ironically enough, preaches works, not grace, and a growing number of Christians who neither understand the gospel nor revel in its scandal.
And, don't miss this one (with a better title) The Beautiful Monotony of the Gospel.


Also, be sure to check out the intersection of awesome and rad: this interview by Mark Galli of Mike Horton.

And for something completely different, here is a recent recruitment film for the Unitarians (or at least should be), which proves without a doubt that the God of Majestic Mystery is compassion (ht alittleleaven.com); enjoy!

The Christian Side Hug

What the world needs more of is the "Christian Side Hug." If you are not sure what that means, click here for an explanation. Or you can watch the video below.

Thoughts? Comments?

Stalin, the will and the inability to change

From Robert Conquest’s “Stalin, Breaker of Nations” (mentioned in Mockingbird's interview with Whit Stillman).

One of [Stalin’s] outstanding characteristics was, in many respects, a profound mediocrity melded with a superhuman will-power. It is as though he had a very ordinary brain, but with some lobes extravagantly over-developed, like the horrible skulls in Dali’s early paintings.

On Soviet Psychology: [In] the postwar period, a new Soviet psychology, strongly opposed to Freudian and all other Western schools, accepted the [Ivan] Pavlovian idea, merely adding that the consciousness, as ‘animal’ behavior, could be conditioned by outside pressures, or more generally Marxist- notion that socio-economic relations determine consciousness. Like Lysekoist biology, it reflected the Stalinist doctrine that the new order was creating the ‘new Soviet man’ with characteristics different from, and superior to, those of others. This transformation of the human mind, of the human species, appears to have been among Stalin’s most powerful aims and conviction. (pg 299)

Describing Stalin’s Last Years: So Stalin enters his last phase, possessed even more than before by the demons of suspicion and implacability. He was beginning to have bouts of dizziness, and his psychological condition too continued to deteriorate. In 1951, in a moment of insight, Stalin actually said in front of Mikoyan and Khrushchev, though appearing not to notice them, ‘I’m finished, I trust no one, not even myself.’ His daughter writes that in these last years, he had forgotten all human attachments, he was tortured by fears which became a genuine persecution mania, and in the end his strong nerves gave way. But the mania was not a sick fantasy; he knew and understood that he was hated, and he knew why.

SAVE THE DATE: Mockingbird Mini-Conference in Pensacola, FL! Jan 29-30th, 2010

Calling all Mockingbirds in the Southeast - in conjunction with Christ Church Pensacola, we are proud to announce our first ever mini-conference! The event takes place Friday 1/29 - Saturday 1/30 in Pensacola, FL (18 W. Wright St, Pensacola) and will feature talks from none other than Dr. Mark Mattes.

The theme will be "God's Grace In A World Of Glory". Together we’ll delve into the theological and cultural underpinnings of how God’s forgiveness finds and transforms us even in the midst of our hectic modern lives. Our approach will be biblically-rooted and Cross-centered, with an emphasis on how the Gospel speaks to the problems and demands of everyday life. We have no doubt that this will be a truly life-changing event!

The conference will run from Friday evening 1/29 at 6:30pm until following day, Saturday 1/30 at 4pm. Meals will be provided. The event is open to anyone and everyone - to rsvp, email Jeff Hual at jhual1969@gmail.com. All other details, including how to pre-register, coming soon.

p.s. This is not to be confused with the annual Mockingbird Conference in NYC, happening April 15-17th, featuring talks from Dr. Rod Rosenbladt and, as we are now excited to confirm, The Rt. Rev. Dr. FitzSimons Allison.

Exclusive Interview: Mark Galli of Christianity Today (pt. 1)

Back in July, many of us at Mockingbird discovered (see earlier blog posts here and here) the writings of Mark Galli, Senior Managing Editor of Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of Evangelicalism (started in 1956 by Billy Graham). Galli's grasp of the Gospel—God’s grace in Jesus Christ to broken human beings (including Christians who can't get it together)—was as deeply refreshing as it was (almost) unique in the wider world of Evangelical Christianity. We were so intrigued that we sat down with him to find out more. It proved to be a fascinating conversation about the current landscape of Evangelicalism, the radical nature of the Gospel, and the pattern of the Christian life. UPDATE: Mark Galli will be the keynote speaker at the 2011 Mockingbird Conference in New York City, 3/31-4/2. Go here for more information.

Here's Part 1 of the interview.

Mockingbird: Christianity Today is a magazine written for a broad spectrum of theological perspectives. But in your regular Soulwork column, you have a distinct theological perspective that emphasizes God’s radical grace in the face of our human brokenness and narcissism. What’s the origin of your perspective and what role does it play in the magazine?

Mark Galli: You’re right that Christianity Today is a magazine for all evangelicals. So my job involves publishing stuff I may disagree with on a personal theological level. But CT is like a village green. People from all backgrounds can come together and talk about what they think they should be doing in the name of Christ in the world. In that, there’s a certain continuity and coherence, maybe less than there used to be, but it's still there: a passion to love Christ and serve him in the world.

This kind of activism has characterized evangelicalism from day one. That, to me, is our movement’s greatest strength and our Achilles heel. That is, on the one hand, I’m just always impressed how when you go to the far reaches of the planet and you find people who are working in the worst situations, they’re evangelicals. But at the same time, that activism is almost like an addiction. We need a voice in there saying, “Now, let’s remember from whence all this activism comes; what is its root and where is it leading?”

So one of my concerns as a writer and as the Senior Managing Editor of CT is to keep ringing that bell, that it all begins with God. And it all ends in God. And that it’s all done through God and through his grace. Anything that we achieve or call an achievement—even using that word “achievement” is problematic—has to be understood as God’s achievement. So in fact, the cover story, which I wrote, for the October issue was called, “In the Beginning, Grace.” And it’s an overview of what I consider to be the main concern with the evangelical movement right now; it’s addicted to the horizontal: what we do, what we’re doing wrong and how we should fix it. And I make a case that the very first thing we should do when we see a horizontal problem in the movement is that we should think vertically. We should be looking to the cross, first and foremost. So that is kind of a public setting of a statement that I hope we will be emphasizing in the magazine. And again, not at the expense of all the great things evangelicals are doing, but to keep pounding home the priority of grace in everything we do.

There was a lot of heated response to your recent column, "The Scandal of the Public Evangelical." You said that being sanctified in this life is mostly about becoming increasingly aware of just how much we are, as the Book of Common Prayer says, “miserable offenders” and there “is no health in us.” Essentially, realizing how bad we are, and the immensity of God's grace, and simply relying on that. Some people loved it, some hated it. One guy called it “appalling grace.” Why are people so heated in their response to this?

I don’t know that I’ve talked about grace in the radical nature in which Paul and the New Testament talk about it unless people are shocked and appalled by what I’ve said. The doctrine of grace is so radical and so contrary to our assumptions about what religion is about, that once we express it in a clear fashion, it will appall people. Because we’re all so anxious—even people like me who preach grace—to justify our lives. We want our lives to be meaningful, purposeful, useful. So we hook our futures to God and think, “Now I can really make my life purposeful and useful and I can do something for God in the world. And if I work with God, he’s going to change me.” We’re not so interested in God a lot of times, we’re tired of who we are and we're more interested in wanting to be a different kind of person so we can feel better about ourselves. So much of our religious language and religious motive is about ourselves: justifying ourselves or improving ourselves, with God as a means to that end. Well, the fact of the matter is it’s not about you. But that’s shocking and appalling to most people because we’re so used to thinking that religion is about us, even though we’ve learned to use religious language to suggest otherwise. But in fact, it really ends up being all about us.


The other thing is the whole business of “transformation.” I notice how often that word comes up—our lives can be transformed, our churches can be transformed, our culture can be transformed. We imagine if we do everything right according to what the New Testament teaches us, that things will be completely changed. And if they aren’t completely changed, I’ve either bet my life on something that’s not true, or the Gospel itself is not true.

I just keep on coming back to Luther’s truth that we are simultaneously justified and sinners. I keep on looking at my own life, and at church history, and I realize that when the Gospel talks about transformation, it can’t possibly mean an actual, literal change in this life of a dramatic nature, except in a few instances. It must be primarily eschatological; it must be referring to the fact that we will in fact be changed. The essential thing to make change possible has occurred—Christ died and rose again. (And in this life we will see flashes of that, just like in Jesus’ ministry there were moments when the Kingdom broke in and we see a miracle. And these moments tell us there is something better awaiting for us and God is gracious enough at times to allow a person or a church or a community to experience transformation at some level.) But we can’t get into the habit of thinking that this dramatic change is normal, this side of the Kingdom. What’s normal this side of the Kingdom is falling into sin (in big or small ways), and then appropriating the grace of God and looking forward to the transformation to come.

Now, some people would say that it’s depressing that I can’t change. Well, it’s not depressing, it’s freeing! It’s depressing and oppressive to think every morning that I somehow have to be better than I was the day before to justify my Christian religion and to justify my faith. That’s the oppressive thing. The freeing thing is to realize that I am a sinner and God has accepted me as such. And yes, of course we're called to strive and be better and to love and all those things—duh!—that’s not the issue. The issue is the motive out of which that comes and what we actually expect to happen as a result of that.

A lot of this is driven by my own personal spiritual journey and is hammered home by the biblical message, and something that Luther got really well: the harder I try to be a good Christian, I notice the worse Christian I am: more self-righteous, more impatient, more frustrated. But when I stop trying to be a good Christian and just realize I am a sinner and that God has accepted me, and that’s the way it is, that, for some reason, releases the striving part of me that makes life harder, and all of a sudden I find myself, surprisingly, more patient, more compassionate, less judgmental and more joyful. So I think that kind of personal experience is a merely reflection of what the Gospel truth is. And those moments when I experience that, that’s wonderful.

Many people have a personal story of going from legalistic Christianity to a new Gospel-focused faith centered on the cross, often due to some personal crisis. You talk in your book Jesus Mean and Wild about suffering being that thing which "plows the field" of the human heart so that grace can come in. Was that you?

Well, that for me is what sanctification is all about. It’s the see-saw, the going back-and-forth. The natural human nature wants to take over and begin building that tower that reaches to the heavens. That is part of the original sin of wanting to know the difference between good and evil, so we’re going to pluck that fruit from the tree. We just want to do it all the time; I want to do it all the time. There have been many moments, many times in my life when I’ve had to stop and say, “You know, this isn’t working. And the reason it’s not working is that I’m trying to build this tower up to the heavens.” And I think that’s the nature of the Christian life, building the tower and then have it come crashing down, and then having the reality of the Gospel sink deeper and deeper into your life. It’s something as a preacher and a speaker you have to face into.

When I was a preacher, one of the ways I had to learn it was every single week I had to stand up and say something to the congregation. And there were some weeks when I could stand up there and say, “I’m doing okay in this regard.” But most weeks, “I don’t know why I’m standing up here saying this. I don’t know that I have my act together.” What occurred to me was that it wasn’t about me as a preacher having my act together before I can proclaim the grace and mercy of God. It’s about something bigger than myself. And that thing that a preacher is forced to confront every Sunday morning, if he has any sense of self-awareness, is the same thing that all of us have to confront when we step out of bed: “Whose day is this? Is this my day to show God how much I can achieve for him? Or is this my day to live in his grace and see what comes of it?”

Who have been your theological allies and mentors along this path? Who has influenced you? You’ve talked about Luther, you’ve mentioned Barth. Who else would you put on that list?

Probably those two would be the most important. Though who I’ve read the most is Karl Barth. Especially recently. That’s probably why you’re seeing a new intensity in my writing on this. I’m exploring writing a book on Barth. And in the course of doing that I was reminded how much I really like this guy. I had not read him in twenty years, but whenever I do read him, he absolutely thrills me with the radical nature of God’s grace to us. What I’m really trying to do is to understand in Barthian terms, how that moment of God’s alienation, when we feel alienated by God, when we feel judged by God, that God is the stranger, that God disapproves of us, that at that very moment it’s the God of mercy who’s beginning to work in our lives. And that’s what I’d like to bring out in a book.

Bonhoeffer in my 20s was really important. I’ve also read a lot of Orthodox spirituality. There are two types – there’s the “climb the spiritual ladder” type, which always feels dreary to me. And there’s another type of Orthodox theology which is radically God-initiated and grace-centered. And that’s what I’ve always appreciated.

But in reality, I don’t often know who my influences have been. One of the weaknesses of my writing, is I can write long, long passages and never actually quote anyone. And I don’t quote anyone because I don’t consciously know where I’ve gotten this information. And I pridefully think, “Wow, this is good, this is fresh.” And then I’ll pick a book that’s gotten dusty on my shelves, that I’ve marked up 20 years ago and I’ll realize it’s all from that author. The older I am, I realize I don’t have an original idea in me.


CLICK HERE FOR PART TWO.

Another Week Ends: Prosperity Mortgages, Megan Fox, South Africa, Nietzsche, Community, Wii Pray, Dylan

1. Not to beat a dead horse, but Hanna Rosin (she of Ehrenreich book review/God's Harvard fame) wrote a lengthy cover story about the prosperity gospel for The Atlantic this past month entitled "Did Christianity Cause The Market To Crash?". She reports that "the growth of the prosperity gospel tracks fairly closely to the pattern of foreclosure hot spots", even detailing the efforts of certain loan officers to reach out to prosperity pastors. Her criticisms may not exactly be breaking news, and thankfully it's not all one-note - there are some touching examples of hope offered to the hopeless - but her final conclusion is pretty condemning:

It is not all that surprising that the prosperity gospel persists despite its obvious failure to pay off. Much of popular religion these days is characterized by a vast gap between aspirations and reality. Few of Sarah Palin’s religious compatriots were shocked by her messy family life, because they’ve grown used to the paradoxes; some of the most socially conservative evangelical churches also have extremely high rates of teenage pregnancies, out-of-wedlock births, and divorce.

On a related note, the NY Times Magazine tells us that controversial Transformers starlet/sex symbol Megan Fox grew up in a pentecostal home and attended a Christian high school (ht RJ). Go figure.

2. Very thought-provoking article in The NY Times this week about forgiveness and who has the authority to grant it, detailing the current outrage in South Africa over a black university president's decision to pardon four white students expelled for racism. Apparently not everyone is on board with his attempt at reconciliation (ht JD):

But [Dr. Jansen's] gesture — the audacity of his forgiveness — dominated South Africa’s headlines for weeks, firing a controversy that continues to emit heat. Mr. Jansen [first black president of The University Of The Free State] most certainly has his champions. He was already a highly regarded educator, a Fulbright scholar with a Ph.D. from Stanford. Now he is also praised for his courage.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, called him a “great man” whose inauguration speech displayed the bold and merciful spirit of Jesus. “Forgiveness is not for sissies,” the archbishop said. But many others considered Mr. Jansen’s action to be insensitive and arrogant. Who was he to pardon those who had blackened the eye of the nation?

3. A fascinating discussion of Friedrich Nietzsche's relationship to the Pietism in which he grew up, over at Christianity Today (ht JDK). A new book entitled Pious Nietzsche: Decadence and Dionysian Faith asserts that Nietzsche, "transplanted a form of Pietism onto the soil of Dionysus or, better, cultivated the apparently alien form of Dionysus on the soil of native Pietism. He may not have succeeded in overcoming his childhood Pietism. But it is what Nietzsche was about, even if he did not fully know it."

The author concludes by asking a very timely question about the book's central claim, "is [this] a kind of (broadly) theological thesis, a hint that, if a superficial atheism turns out to be an ersatz religion, it matters a lot that we see, describe, and call it as such?"

4. You may not have caught last week's episode of Community (a new NBC sitcom that keeps getting better and better), but it hinged on a debate about "is man inherently good or inherently evil?". Believe it or not, our beloved low anthropology received a sympathetic and un-Hollywood-like airing, via a series of rather clever and effective illustrations. The episode also touched on determinism/predestination in a pretty charming way (ht CZ).

5. I'm pretty sure this is a joke, but you have to admit it's a good one. This, however, is not a joke, but you have to admit that it's a good one too.

6. Speaking of which, High Street Hymns has just released its first collection of Christmas and Advent hymns, "Love Shall Be Our Token", which you can purchase here. Highly Recommended.

Caption Contest

Disregarding the caption provided, give this picture a law/gospel caption.

From My Facebook Newsfeed...

A friend of mine posted this on her Facebook page today:

"The patriarch Jacob…saw a vision of God and cried out in wonder, “Surely the Lord is in this place; and I knew it not.” Jacob had never been for one small division of a moment outside the circle of the all-pervading Presence. But he knew it not. That was his trouble, and it is ours. Men [or women] do not know that God is here. What a difference it would make if they knew."

- A.W. Tozer

Thursday Morning Rock N Roll: Prince plays George Harrison (and The Cross)

The Wilburys do a decent job with the vocals but it is Prince's solo, which begins around the 3:30 mark, that is the real gem here. Apparently he had never heard the song before being asked to contribute...

And then there's this, my favorite Prince song of all time (with the possible of exception of '7').

11 The Cross - LoveSexy Tour Dortmund 1988
Uploaded by samsarax. - See the latest featured music videos.

What's Wrong With This Picture?

And what key Mockingbird-esque theme does it illustrate? (More than one possible answer to both questions.)

Judgment And Love: The Expanded Edition

Mockingbird is proud to announce the release of Judgment And Love: The Expanded Edition! A collection of 35 true-life stories illustrating the powerful truth that when love is shown in the face of deserved judgment, lives are changed, this book also serves as an accessible and heartfelt introduction to the realities of the Christian message.

Edited by Sean Norris and featuring contributions from pretty much all of the bloggers that you find here, we are really excited about this project. The new edition has been given a complete face-lift and is over 50% longer (i.e. tons of new content!). Copies are available online for a suggested donation of $15. Click here for a preview.

ALSO - If you live anywhere near New York City, we are throwing a party tomorrow evening 11/19 to celebrate its release and would love for you to join us. 7ish to 9:30ish PM in The Chapel at St George's Church (209 E 16th St, NYC, facing the square). No need to rsvp - just show up. Drinks and hors d'oeuvres will be served and discounted books will be available. We'll have a short presentation and reading from the book at 7:45pm, followed by a few words about Mockingbird. Tell everyone you've ever met.

Monster from the Id

"The heart is deceitful above all things,and desperately sick;who can understand it?" - Jeremiah 17:9

Excerpt from Charles Dickens' Little Dorrit

The Mrs. Clennam character is attempting to justify a crime she has committed in the service of 'fighting sin', to the title character (ht PZ):

"I have done", said Mrs. Clennam ,"what was given to me to do. I have set myself against evil... I have been an instrument of severity against sin. Have not mere sinners like myself been commissioned to lay it low in all time?"

"In all time?" repeated Little Dorrit. ...

"O, Mrs. Clennam, Mrs. Clennam." said Little Dorrit, "angry feelings and unforgiving deeds are no comfort and no guide to you and me. My life has been passed in this poor prison, and my teaching has been very defective; but let me implore you to remember later and better days. Be guided, only, by the healer of the sick, the raiser of the dead, the friend of all who were afflicted and forlorn, the patient Master who shed tears of compassion for our infirmities. We cannot but be right if we put all the rest away ...

There is no vengeance and no infliction of suffering in His life, I am sure..."

In the softened light of the window, looking from the scene of her early trials to the shining sky, she was not in stronger opposition to the black figure in the shade, than the life and doctrine on which she rested were to that figure's history. It bent its head low again, and said not a word.

P.S. In his working notes for Little Dorrit, called Number Plans, Dickens described this scene under the heading, 'Set the darkness and vengeance against the New Testament'.

James Brown: Denial, Drunkenness and The Second Coming

Be sure to watch through to the part where he discusses his Gospel magazine. Caption ideas welcome in the comments section!

"For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do." Galatians 5:17

Wine Tasting, Vodka and Reason

Seeing the above bumper sticker in Washington DC this weekend, I was faced once again with the false dichotomy between religion and critical thought. Atheists, 'positive thinkers', and other ideologists like to believe that unlike religious people, they actually employ their immutable power of reason or thinking.

But how effective are our powers of reason? More often than not, they are highly subjective, self serving and misleading. At the very least I would say that we have an inflated sense of our ability to reason consistently or objectively.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal helped demonstrate this claim, highlighting the flaws and inconsistencies of the vital and influential wine rating system. One winemaker/statistician wondered why the same batch of wine he put out would win medals at one competition and absolutely nothing at the other. So he began a study of professional wine tasters and sommeliers. And what he and others have found is that the judges and 'experts' of these competitions are - surprise, surprise - inconsistent and often (unknowingly) very subjective and biased.

In one test, red food coloring was put into multiple glasses of a white wine to make it look like glasses of rose, Bordeaux, sherry etc. Although they were all the exact same wine, the testers thought they tasted like they were labeled. Similarly, 57 wine experts were served two glasses of the same wine. But they were poured from an expensive label bottle and a cheap table wine. A significant portion of the 'experts' chose the expensive label over the cheap one.

Okay, you say, we are easily tricked, and these tactics are not exactly fair. It gets better. The same wine/statistician also found out that wine experts were inconsistent. In a test of a hundred or so wines, a few were unknowingly 'resubmitted' or re-tested. The research found that the same expert rated the same wine differently each time (sometimes by as much as 4 points). GM Pucilowski, the chief judge at the California State Fair wine competition, finally allowed the results of this study to be published last year:

"I'm happy we did the study," said Mr. Pucilowski, "though I'm not exactly happy with the results. We have the best judges, but maybe we humans are not as good as we say we are."

Eureka!

I remember a 20/20 episode a few years ago where 10 relatively young New Yorkers were asked what their favorite vodka was. They all said things like "Grey Goose is totally my vodka", and "Stoli all the way." Then they took them out to a bar in Manhattan to do some blind taste tests of vodka and Cosmopolitans. They all hated the drinks with Grey Goose and Stoli, but they overwhelmingly loved one brand in particular: the economically priced Smirnoff vodka. The elite image and high cost of the product changed the way it tasted!

These studies remind us just how blind we are to ourselves. Whether you are Renee Descartes or the 'reasonable' Richard Dawkins, you may not want to put all your eggs in the human brain basket. Otherwise you will eventually look foolish.

One of the fundamental prerequisites for the Gospel is that belief that you/me (including your/my brain) are utterly insufficient to the task of life. Unfortunately, that reality is impossible to recognize or to make sense of on your own. Outside Help is needed.

Unmerited grace and limitless forgiveness do not make 'sense.' They are, however, very Wise.

1 Corinthians 1:20-23:

Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.
For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom,
but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles,