Would you chain yourself to a tree to save it? Here, have a cheap bracelet.

In the world of religiosity, there are levels, or perhaps they're Dantéan spheres, of holiness. Those within each sphere look very similar to each other no matter which god they've chosen to follow: the Omnipotent God, the Mother Earth, or the Perfect Man. Among the grandest sphere you'll find mystics, monks and priests. Beneath them the religious -- they attend the right meetings, read the right books, and make decisions based on their beliefs. In the level below that fall those who are really more nominal about their beliefs, talking the talk now and then, but walking the walk only when it suits their needs. The bulk of people fall here. They may follow one system of beliefs while paying lip service to an entirely different religion. The worst of these we call hypocrites. The rest are just how people are, we might say with a shrug. There is no sphere for those who are against a set of beliefs, because the very act of being against something gives this group of people a distinct set of beliefs of their own, and therefore would relegate them to one of the spheres already mentioned. The goal of the leadership of any movement is to draw people from that outer sphere to one of the inner ones. But I wonder, sometimes, whether their tactics don't really just draw people from one part of the outer circle to a different part of the outer circle, all the while lining the pockets, or stroking the egos, of those in the center -- opiating the masses for the self-gratification of the greedy shepherds.

A few weeks back I received an invitation from the Sierra Club in the mail. For anyone unfamiliar with the Sierra Club, they are (according to their website) "the largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States." One of the leaflets in the invitation asked me, "Would you chain yourself to a tree to save it?" In other words, what they were saying was, "Would you be willing to move to the in-most circle -- the realm of mystics, monks and priests -- to show your total dedication to the cause?" It was an evangelical call, one that was crafted to stir my blood and give me hope that I, too, could be radical and cool in my religion of environmentalism. It was designed to strike a cord within me that I could be great. I could be radical. Or, if I would just join the Sierra Club, I could at least be associated with such greatness. I could wear a backpack and bracelet that would mark me as a fanatic who's willing to go all out for the cause -- nevermind the fact that the backpack and bracelet are really tools of evangelism that ultimately undermine the cause. (The bracelet is shown on the right in the photo and the offer for the backpack is in the lower left. The bracelet is the tease, the backpack is the hook.) 

I would think that an environmental organization would, as one of its standard modes of operation, reduce, reuse and recycle, and encourage others to do the same. And yet here they've not only wasted some trees to generate the paper the evangelical call was printed on, but they've included a ridiculously cheap bracelet in the letter that, if tossed into the recycling bin without first being removed from the envelope, could muck up an entire load of paper recycling. I can't imagine anyone over the age of 5 or 6 being thrilled with such a bracelet, so for those that caught the fact it was in the envelope before they tossed the paper into recycling are now left with the choice of throwing it away (Rather than reducing their trash, the Sierra Club has just helped them to increase it.) or donating it to charity (where it'll most likely get thrown out as too cheap to sell). 

And that's just the bracelet. If you join now at the low introductory rate of $15, you'll receive an official Sierra Club 1892 Rucksack in the same style as the one used so long ago by John Muir, the founder of the club. It might be in the same style, but I'd bet money that not only is it made of very different material (something petroleum based?) but it was also probably made in China. There's no way they could make anything even remotely the same quality as John Muir's original rucksack for under $15, so not only are you contributing to environmental problems by procuring this petroleum based product that had to travel half way around the world to get to you and that was most likely made under lax environmental regulations, thereby contributing to the pollution of another nation, but it's not going to last long and will soon be yet another item you can add to the land fill. 

Why would the Sierra Club so brashly invalidate its own message by marketing in this way? Well, it takes a lot of work to become the "largest and most influential" environmental organization in the United States. Sometimes you have to do things that don't quite fit your message in order to further spread your message. In fact, sometimes you have to do things that argue directly against your message... in order to further spread your message. 

It's a philosophy that I see used not just by organizations like the Sierra Club, but within church circles as well. If the message is only spread through numerical growth, the argument goes, then numerical growth is of key importance. So services, programs, style and focus all need to be such that they will create the largest numerical growth possible within the congregation. And what draws people to an organization? A sense that perhaps they can be, if not the fanatic in the center circle, at least closely associated with the inner circle through being a part of a church that: (choose all that apply) is cool, is happening, is growing, is "authentic" (whatever that means), is exciting, is deep, that makes me feel good, that makes me feel like I get it and the rest of the world doesn't, that makes me feel special.

There's a common belief in many Christian circles that bigger is better. Quick growth is better. Younger is better. Newer is better. And if your congregation isn't young, energetic and growing by leaps and bounds numerically, then the opposite must be true. The converse of the belief is that if an organization is not growing, then it is ineffective at accomplishing its goal. Such congregations are just old and dried up and outdated. But what is most egregious, I find, is that the mentality, then, is to grow at all costs. Can you truly convey a message by contradicting it? And why do we buy that when it's a lie. It's a lie that we're quick to believe no matter which congregation we're in, the large or small, the energetic or the faithfully plodding along.

I'm not saying that growth is bad and stagnation is good. Far from it. What I'm saying is that the church has a message. It has been called not only to share the message, but to live it. When we decide that sharing the message is so important that we can stop living it in order to share it better, then "we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us." (ripped from 1 John 1:8) Part of the message is perseverance. Part of the message is faithfulness. When we criticize those who have faithfully persevered even through difficult times we are criticizing them for taking the message of the gospel to heart and living it out. We are undermining our own ability to share the message by condemning our own brethren for holding true to the message. We may look or sound very incredibly cool. We may get people in that outer circle to stop and think, "I want to be in that inner circle. I want to be radical for Jesus." But what kind of radicality do we call them to? If they buy the t-shirts and raise their hands at the meetings and go our for a beer with their small group, have they really moved from the outer circle to an inner circle? If their choice to follow God depends primarily upon their own need to feel like they're a part of something or they like the energized feeling they get after a service or they need to be "fed," are they really following God, or are they submitting to a message of consumerism, or me-ism, or coolness? If you follow God for the buzz, are you following God or the buzz?

Are we calling people to Jesus? Or are we just encouraging them to move around in the nominal circle they were already a part of in order to make ourselves look more important?

Were the gods to boast of their followers, what would they say?

I recently finished the book, Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card. And I'm nearly done with the fourth book in the series, Children of the Mind. (I going way out of order only because that's how the library got the books to me and I wasn't really paying attention when I started in on book 4.)

They are both very thought provoking books (which is probably why Card has won both Hugo and Nebula awards for his writing). In the fourth book, there are quotes from what I believe is a fictitious book called The God Whispers of Han Qing Jao. The following quote certainly hits a chord.

"Do the gods of different nations talk to each other?
Do the gods of Chinese cities speak to the ancestors of the Japanese?
To the lords of Xibalba? To Allah? Yahweh? Vishnu?
Is there some annual get-together where they compare each other's worshippers?
Mine will bow their faces to the floor and trace woodgrain lines for me, says one.
Mine will sacrifice animals, says another.
Mine will kill anyone who insults me, says a third.
Here is the question I think of most often:
Are there any who can honestly boast,
My worshippers obey my good laws, and treat each other kindly, and live simple generous lives?

from The God Whisperers of Han Qing Jao"
by Scott Orson Card in his book, Children of the Mind

1 in 4 Americans can't think of recent positive contribution by Christians

http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_16432579

One in four Americans said they couldn't think of a single positive societal contribution made by Christians in recent years, according to a nationwide survey released Monday. -- The Denver Post

Can you? (You don't have to be an American to play along.)

War of Words: Getting to the Heart of Your Communication Struggles

Rating:
Category:	Books
Genre:	Religion & Spirituality
Author:	Paul David Tripp

This past summer, the gals in our church decided to read and discuss a book together. We chose War of Words, by Paul David Tripp. The book is divided into 3 main sections, so we met three times throughout the summer break to discuss a section each time. I’ve already written about my thoughts on the first part of the book, which bothered me both because of how he supported his point, but also because of how he overstated his position. However, I thought the rest of his book was not only better written (although he continued to persist in aiming in one direction while continually pointing to another), but he also had a lot of really good things to say. (In other words, it's a good thing I was reading this book in a group because if I was reading it on my own, I probably would have chucked it a few chapters in. But having to meet with other folks to discuss the rest of the book kept me plugging on through.)

Let me first address my biggest pet peeve with this book before I get on to acknowledging several of the excellent things he said. The book is titled the War of Words because the goal is to teach Christians, in particular, how to speak in a way that reflects the loving, forgiving, gracious character of God. So obviously, Tripp's focus was on what people say to one another. But he repeatedly said things such as:

"...it is important to recognize that the war of words is actually the fruit of a greater, more fundamental war. This is the war of wars; it is what life is about." (p. 37)

"Like all wars, this war is for control. It is a war for our hearts." (p. 39)

"...a life of godly communication is rooted in a personal recognition of the sovereignty of God." (p. 69)

"The war of words is, at bottom, a war for sovereignty." - page 69

In other words, the heart of the matter isn't our words at all, but the heart (or attitude) that our words spring up out of. I feel like Tripp is pointing me in one direction ("focus on the conversation" - "the words are the issue") and then he keeps redirecting me toward the "heart of the matter" which is our attitudes and beliefs. I suppose an analogy would be if a doctor wrote a book on the "War of the Cough" and then repeatedly said throughout the book that the cough wasn't the essential core of the problem but the cold that caused it. If that's the case, then why not focus on the cold throughout the book and address the cough as needed within that discussion? Why title the book and spend the entire first section of the book focusing on the symptom only to undermine both of those by focusing on the underlying heart of the matter for the entire rest of the book? Why not get the focus straight from the get-go and deal with the symptoms throughout as well... as symptoms, not as the central, but not primary, problem? I found this continued bifurcation of focus to be distracting as I read.

And yet, I think Tripp has some excellent things to say as well. I do agree that the root of relational problems often has far more to do with our attitudes, our need to be right, and the sense that we are in control of our lives than what words we use or how we couch them. In disagreements we often approach the other person as the enemy, rather than seeing the disunity or anger as the enemy and both our self and our supposed opponent as the victims. Christians in particular are keen to use the Bible as a weapon against our own spiritual family rather than applying it as a balm to heal the wounds that divide.

Right relationships come about when we also have a right understanding of ourselves. If we think that we know more, know better, and act better than those around us, it's quite likely that we'll have a fair bit of disunity (within our family, our workplace, our congregation, etc.). But if we are willing to take an honest look at ourselves, acknowledge our own faults, accept the help others are willing to give to change our attitudes or our behaviors, then we can grow, and change, and heal. It boils down to recognizing that we are not divine. We are not God. We don't know it all. And even when we're right about an issue, lording that rightness over another does more harm than good. It's not just our knowledge or beliefs that must be accurate, but our attitudes as well. If we cannot speak the truth in love, then we'd best just shut up until we can.

Tripp says that "our words should bring God the glory he deserves. And second, our words should bring redemptive good into the lives of the people God has placed around us." In other words, we should love the Lord our God with all our heart and love our neighbor as our self. As Christians, we should be ambassadors for God who help to bring about God's redemptive purposes, rather than ambassadors who act as agents of wrath - wrath that wells up our of our own selfishness. God is not a tool in our lives that we can wield to get our own way. In fact, entirely the opposite is true. Jesus said, "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." We're not known to be Jesus' disciples because we're right, or our opinions are shown to be better, or we act more godly than other people. We're known to be disciples because we are people who, even in difficult relationships -- like with our enemies -- operate with an attitude of love.

So in the end I think I'd recommend this book. But if you're going to skim at any point, I'd suggest skimming the first three chapters. This book challenges some of the standards attitudes and opinions within the church (at least the church in America) and in that regard I think it makes a good book for discussion. The evangelical American church is rather known for being arrogant, self-righteous, and unforgiving. As Tripp says, "It is never okay to communicate in ways that contradict [God's] message, methods, and character." (Which sounds very much like what Os Guiness said as well.) And yet Christians frequently do exactly that. Until we get to the heart of the matter, I think Christians will continue to be arrogant and bitter ambassadors for a God who is neither.

---

Quotes from the book

"Winning the war of words means living with eyes open, aware not only of our own struggle, but of other pilgrims struggling on the journey with us."

"Paul says, 'Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently....' Let's be sure we understand these words. Notice first that Paul does not say, 'If you catch someone in a sin...' He is not talking about sneaking up on someone to catch him in the act! Rather, he is talking about how we as sinners get 'caught' -- that is, entrapped and ensnared in sin."

"Self-indulgent, sin-indulgent talk contradicts our identity as the children of grace."

"Gentleness doesn't mean compromising the truth. Rather, it means keeping the truth from being compromised by harshness and insensitivity."

"When we are wronged, the thing of highest importance is not that we feel satisfied or avenged, but that we respond according to God's plan and for his glory."

"We seem to forget that, really, there is only one enemy -- and it is not the person being confronted! The purpose of confrontation is not to stand against the person, but to stand alongside him, pointing out the things God wants him to see, confess, and forsake."

"The lack of forgiveness causes us to fight God rather than submit to him and causes us to stand against rather than with one another."

"Truth is the casualty when I love myself more than I love you."

More Guinness: The Case for Civility

"At one level, in resisting what they see as wrong forces, Christian arguments have become sub-Christian, even anti-Christian." -- Os Guinness

Os Guinness Part 1 from CPX on Vimeo.

Thanks to Jason (WiselyWoven) for the link.

The story of God and Guinness

I just finished reading "The story of God and Guinness: How the faith of Arthur Guinness inspired the vision for his famous beer". 

I knew that Guinness beer has been around for ages and ages, but I didn't know much about the Guinnesses themselves. This article details the relationship between the Guinnesses' faith and their work practices, which are inspiring. 

You Shall Not Steal - A Shazam Moment

During our Sunday morning service this week, Kevin read another of the 10 commandments. (We've been hitting one a week.)  This week was "You shall not steal." That's pretty short and sweet. But it, and Kevin's commentary after reading it, and the Mountains Beyond Mountains book I finished recently, have all gotten me to thinking about myself and in what ways I steal from others. 

I suppose it was one of those moments when I had had have a concept sitting around in my head for ages and ages but suddenly that concept hit the reality of my life at a specific moment in time and it was suddenly like Gomer Pile had yelled "Shazam!" and little light bulbs started going off in my head. And I pictured myself filling my shopping cart with things at Target and each purchase being just one more way in which I've gathered resources to myself that weren't meant for me. 

The quote that I mentioned in my Mountains Beyond Mountains review is particularly what hit me. 

How could a just God permit great misery? The Haitian peasants answered with a proverb:"Bondye konn bay, men li pa konn separe," in literal translation, "God gives but doesn't share." This meant, as Farmer would later explain it, "God gives us humans everything we need to flourish, but he's not the one who's supposed to divvy up the loot. That charge was laid upon us."

And I realized that it wasn't just someone else buying something they didn't really need that was a problem. ME buying something that I didn't really need was a problem. I've tried to reduce our expenses before and buy things used and so on. But it has been more because I wanted to "reduce" or "reuse" than because I held clearly in my mind the idea that I needed to share the resources that God had given to us (us plural, as in, "us, the whole wide world").

Don't get me wrong. We give. We give to our church, to Compassion International, to the Door of Faith Orphanage, and to several other organizations and people. I feel like I have a grasp on giving. What I didn't have in my head was the picture of the person in need who will be missing out on something because of my purchase. 

I know, there's the whole, "But your purchase gave someone in that needy country a job (where they were able to make 6 cents an hour building that for you)." Yeah, yeah. My purchase isn't greed on my part, it's benevolence. Right. But really that's missing the point entirely. My hoarding of stuff doesn't benefit anyone (not even myself because then I have to find a way to cram that stuff into the house). I need to find a way to live not just with less, but more simply over all.  (And with less doesn't mean that I have less. Just that I buy less. There's the whole "Live Simply" movement that involves buying lots of stuff and then getting rid of it quickly. I really don't think that benefits anyone, even if it looks nicely austere.) 

It seems like I've tried spending less many, many times in the past and then the kids need clothes or I need a new bookshelf or.... Yeah. So, what's the trick to really making it happen? 

The Magnificent Ability Christians Have of Munging Things

As both church treasurer and the office admin for a non-profit (soon to be a private foundation, which I don't think can be called a non-profit anymore, can it?), I end up with the occasional oddball letter in my mailbox. One that I received recently is, in my opinion, a classic example of how Christians munge things together without, apparently realizing that they're doing it (or that doing so lacks integrity). Here's a copy of the letter (with all formatting as shown in the original):

SOLDIERS OF CHRIST ARISE

This is a wake up call to God's people! In America, God and His son, Jesus, are cursed in the media, in the public arena and in the market place, all with little overt negative reaction or correction by believers in His Son.  Muslims on the other hand, are willing to die for Allah and Mohammed.  They will not permit criticism of their religion in any way, even using violence if necessary. Muslims stress morals, daily prayers and clean living.
What happened to our morals in this land once established on faith? What happened to the faith of our fathers? What happened to morality throughout this land? We sit back and hope things will change for the better while they deteriorate. Regardless of what the "Word" demands on homosexuality, many large businesses support same sex marriage with funds and personnel. Lobbyists have been able to push their agenda in the schools whereas the Bible is deemphasized or forbidden.
The Word urges Believers to unify to build up the body of Christ to maturity. In every church or religion, there is a lack of will to work in concert to reach a common goal.  Our different interpretations of God's Word keep us from focusing together for Biblical morality. Emphasis on teaching morals is a major need in our pulpits. Scripture teaches that the body will grow to maturity in unity, and only then will there be positive outcomes.  Each denomination is individually ruled, yet all can work as ONE for the morality of this nation. We are losing the battle in families, especially with our young people who are drawn to the dark side of computer technology, television, movies, drugs and a downward lifestyle all because WE failed early on to monitor and express our outrage as worldliness crept in. It is not too late to be assertive.
God generously sent His only Son Jesus because He saw man incapable of directing his steps.  However, with this gift comes the responsibility for our ministries to be proactive in counteracting errant behavior.  You may feel you, and others, have done this.  God is the judge.  If moral standards are emphasized throughout the nation, there will be positive improvement and a reduction in sinful practices.  Why aren't we standing and being counted to bring this nation to the morality about which the apostle Paul spoke? Ponder this message and pass it on to every one you meet.  One person can make a difference.  YOU can make a difference! Will you stand up?

A Pilgrim

What interests me is the confusion about who "we" are. Granted, there are several other interesting pieces to this letter like thinking that terrorists have a lot to teach the church, that the goal of church unity should be for the "morality of this nation", and the strongly stated but completely unsourced statement that emphasizing moral standards will reduce sinful practices. But I think most of those oddball things can be chalked up to the mad ravings of an eccentric outlier.  That confusion about "us" though, that's something that I hear in Bible studies, Sunday school and other Christian gatherings, and it's from some pretty un-eccentric people.

The very first sentence of the letter states that it's to "God's people." Granted, that doesn't necessarily mean Christians, but I think it's safe to assume that that's who the "Pilgrim" had in mind. The second sentence makes clear that an outside group (the media, the public and businesses) is cursing God. After a short digression in which terrorist Muslims are praised before being munged together with non-terrorist Muslims) there's suddenly a switch to a concern about "our morals in this land." Who's morals? The Christians? The Muslims? The general populous of the nation? The media, the public and businesses? The munging has begun.

Throughout the letter it's difficult to tell whether "Pilgrim" is upset about the lack of morality in the church, or in the nation as a whole. It appears to be the latter, but the premise that's made is that the church's morals should be the nation's morals because "this land [was] established on faith." (I could swear that this nation (the U.S.A) was founded upon the declaration of Independence, which is a political document, not a religious one.) In other words, "Pilgrim" seems to be tying the church and the nation so tightly together, that they appear to be one entity with the same regulations, responsibilities, etc.

At what point did the church receive instructions from God to rule the nation (and is it just for one nation, or should the church be ruling all nations)? At what point did those in the nation, who are not Christians, come under the jurisdiction of the church? Jesus was not sent to make us all moral. Nor did he come to make disciples whose chief goal would be to make others moral. Jesus came to bring life, something that had been lost to us specifically because we couldn't keep the laws (morals) that had been given.

To expect those who have not chosen to be one of "God's people" to follow God's laws is inappropriate and a severe misunderstanding of the gospel. The good news is not that we need to be moral people. The good news is that even though we can't be truly moral people, no matter how hard we try, God has provided a means of forgiveness and acceptance anyway.

Eccentrics happen (not just in Christian circles but within every subset of the populous). You generally can't convince them of anything accept that you don't agree with them. But munging is a wider problem and one that I believe is inappropriate and leads to confusion and hurt. Yes, Christians should be exhorted to be loving and kind and gentle and pure and all the other things that are directed in the Bible. But our attitude toward non-Christians should not be one of forcing our morals upon them.  Rather Jesus tells those he sends out to "proclaim the good news," to "cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons." (Mt 10:7,8)

Jesus tells his followers to "first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor's eye." Claiming that someone else's eye is your own, and then attacking the other eye with a vengeance is a serious misinterpretation of that directive. As Christians, as "God's people," it behooves us to be clear about who we are talking to, who we are talking about, and what we have been directed to say to those individuals. Munging just muddies God's name.  

Alcoholics Anonymous vs. the Church

http://stevieg.typepad.com/trudging_the_road_of_happ/addiction/
This is a series of posts in which Steve (a fella I met waaay back in college) goes through the 12 steps of AA (he's gotten through 8 so far) and first explains how they work within AA and then what the church might look like if it took the same rule/step to heart. I think his posts have been provocative so far and would recommend them as a means of thinking through the nature and purpose of the church.

The link takes you to the series of posts specifically on this topic and works just like viewing a tag here works -- which means the posts are going to show up in reverse chronological order when you click through. So scroll to the bottom of the page to start reading.

(For those of you viewing this post via Facebook, you might need to click through to Multiply in order to grab the link to Steve's page. To be honest, I don't remember how Multiply links render when they're cross-posted to FB.)

Beaver Dams Lead to Spiritual Maturity

High Country News published an article about beavers a few weeks ago. Beavers are considered by many to be nothing more than a pesky nuisance. Their dams have been known to cause flooding across popular hiking trails and even threaten some lake front mountain properties. But there's a new movement to bring back the beaver, and in the end, letting the beavers return may not only restore some mountain habitat, but it could also save taxpayers money. Beavers can help to restore soil that has been badly fire damaged along the Rocky Mountains. And their dams might do a better job of slowing water release from the mountains, which would provide water storage, at no cost, to the people and farms down slope.

The article points out that for millenia, beavers have been an integral part of the mountain ecosystem. It wasn't until trappers invaded en masse that beaver populations plummeted from what the trappers described as "60 to 80 beaver" per mile of stream to an estimated 100,000 total after a century or heavy trapping. Because of that, as European settlers moved into the areas where beavers used to live, they found streams that were wide, shallow and fast moving. Despite how beautiful such a scene might be, with the sun glinting off quickly flowing water, these water systems have actually been corrupted. They are out of sync with how they had been running for thousands of years prior. As a forest service hydrologist explained, we have "internalized a degraded stream as natural." 

That line particularly grabbed my attention. What this hydrologist was saying was that we had not only come to believe a lie, but that we had looked upon that lie as something natural -- beautiful even.

From a Christian perspective, these streams are no longer flowing the way God made them to flow because they no longer have the large beaver populations that God had put in place to manage the water. And yet, looking upon these streams, unless you knew how the stream was supposed to look, it would seem to be just fine. One might even go so far as to say that its beauty somehow reflected the glory of God. And yet in saying such a thing, we'd actually be giving high praise to a system that has been perverted from the way it was created to be!

I began to wonder how often we do that. How often have we not only come to believe the lie, but we even elevate it as something extraordinary, something wonderful?! How many things in our lives -- the way we interact with others, the way we do church, the way we set goals and make decisions -- are predicated upon an understanding that is warped by our constrained knowledge of how things are compared to how God meant them to be? How often do we let the culture we grew up in dictate to us what is right and what is wrong? And how often do we tag those "right" things as being God's right things (whether or not they actually are)? 

The mountain ecosystem can be a metaphor in which the beaver filled landscape represents our lives as they would be in God's perfect world, in Eden. The beavers are managers put in place to care for the water ways, and yet these God-chosen managers are seen by us in our fallen state as pesky vermin. I'm not sure what the exact parallel would be with the beavers. Perhaps they are the people in our lives who can speak the truth to us in love. Perhaps they're the people who slow us down long enough to help us reflect on our lives, our actions, our beliefs. How often do we shut the beavers our of our lives thinking that our speedy, sediment filled rush down the hill is how life is supposed to be? How often do we choose what is wrong in the misguided impression that we're doing what's right?

Are Christians Bad for an Empire’s Economy? Should They Be? - Julie Clawson - God’s Politics Blog

http://blog.sojo.net/2009/05/06/are-committed-christians-bad-for-empire-economy/
This is an interesting take on whether we're living out what we believe and what affect doing so might have upon the economy (of all things).

Quote from the post:
"What if we all choose not to buy products made by slave labor? What if we choose not to invest in companies that provide brothel visits with trafficked children as incentives for businessmen? What if we only bought clothing or food for which workers were paid a living wage? Would we maybe then be known for being something other than the lapdogs of Empire?"

Christianity and the Food We Eat

This is a repost of a repost. This article was originally published on my meg.dunn.net site (which has long since expired). It was then republished in the Christian Community group here on Multiply. I started that group back in September 2004, but I've decided to remove myself from there and focus on my DandelionWine site instead. So I'm reposting several reposts that I had put there over to here.

(No promises on the links. I haven't checked them to see which still work. I originally posted this in September 2001).

			Christianity and the Food We Eat What does Christianity have to do with food? Well, everything and nothing. Christians don't have diet restrictions in the same way that Jews, Muslims or Hindus do. And eating or not eating a certain food (even communion) neither makes you a Christian nor bars you from being a Christian. But for a Christian, a follower of Christ, the choices that are made in terms of what and how much to eat can possibility have quite a lot to do with having integrity. If I pray for the poor coffee pickers in Mexico and yet continue to buy coffee that was grown with the use of pesticides (which is killing those same coffee pickers) how compassionate am I really? And if I pray for the poor of Calcutta, but choose to buy the rug from India that was woven by a child laborer just because it is cheaper, am I really showing the integrity that befits one who bears God's name? We no longer live in a local economy where the guy who made my shoes is the same guy who lives across the street. In a global economy you can buy a product that is several steps (and probably several countries) away from the person who actually made it. I not only can not talk to the maker of the shoe and see how he or she is doing, I'd be lucky to be able to track the person down at all. In a global economy, we have to look beyond which product might be best for us and determine what unconscious choices are we making with our purchase? Am I choosing to buy a product that has or will adversely affect others because of its creation, transportation, or sale? Perhaps I choose to by the organic tomatoes from Italy. I have chosen well to buy organic produce, but how much gasoline was used just to cart those tomatoes from Italy to my local grocer? If I choose to buy at the large chain store because their items are cheaper, and I putting my neighbor's mom and pop shop out of business? (And would those items have cost about the same once I figured in how much gas I had to use just to get to the chain store?) And in determining the cost of items that involve transportation, I might also want to consider the other hidden costs such as the amount of taxes I will have to pay to upgrade the roads because of their use (as opposed to the wear and tear the road would receive if people mostly bicycled on it or took the bus). Or the increase in medical costs or 911 costs or police department costs because of accidents on the road that either wouldn't happen if traffic was reduced or that wouldn't be so deadly. (If two bikes collide, it can be ugly. But if two cars collide, the accident is more likely to be deadly. And if two pedestrians collide? !! If only our neighborhoods were walkable!) Calling yourself a Christian means that you have to consider your choices. Granted, we can't always make the best choice. I may not have the money that eating organically requires these days. But at least I could be shopping locally and cutting down on the amount my food has to travel before reaching my mouth. (Local farmers markets are often cheaper than the grocery stores.) If I call myself a Christian, I should, at the very least, make myself aware of the consequences of the decisions I make. Organizations like the Christian Coalition like to point out that Christians should weigh their decisions in choosing presidents, congress people, etc. but how often do we advocate using that same amount of brain power to make everyday choices that in the end could effect our planet (rather, God's planet) far more? In fact, why aren't Christians leading the way in helping people make wise consumer choices? Why aren't we the chief advocates in protecting the environment (it is, after all, God's creation)? Why aren't we bringing poor working conditions to light? Why are we sitting around folding tables in the church all purpose room eating highly processed, pesticide laden food when we could be eating locally grown, organic (fresher and safer) foods and be accomplishing just as much "fellowship" and making globally sensitive choices at the same time (and healthier choices as well!)? There are some Christian organizations that are trying to do exactly that. And there are even more nonChristian organizations that would happily accept any Christians who wanted to join their ranks. Look them up. Get involved. Think before you choose. Christian Organizations Evangelicals for Social Action "Evangelicals working together to challenge and equip the church to be agents of God's redemption " The Other Side a magazine that "has long explored the gospel from 'the other side' of power and privilege." Web of Creation "Transforming Faith-Based Communities for a Sustainable World" US Catholic Conference Environmental Justice Program "a variety of resources for you to use in your parish, diocese, school, etc., to foster care and respect for God's creation" Target Earth buys endangered lands, protect endangered species, shares the love of Jesus, feeds the hungry, and reforests ravaged terrain Earth Ministry engages individuals and congregations in knowing God more fully through deepening relationships with all of God's creation Other Organizations Worth Mentioning The Sierra Club "Practice and promote the responsible use of the earth's ecosystems and resources. " Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life "Protecting creation from generation to generation" Earthday Network The official Earthday site The National Geographic Society is the world¹s largest nonprofit scientific and educational organization Envirolink Network includes information about government policy as it relates to the environmnet, how you can get involved, and suggested products to use. Know of an organization that I should include on one of these lists? Email me. Shop locally, shop organic: find your local food co-op and become a member Other Great Resources Composting Information Throwing food scraps and other biodegradable materials into the trash is poor stewardship. Find out about composting through this site (what it is, how to do it, what to do with the compoast you make, etc.) Seventh Generation Their home page is listed below. This link will take you to their resources page which includes several books to read as well as support groups for those with chemical sensitivities and more. Places to Shop Online (offering alternative options) Seventh Generation Their goal is to provide high quality, environmentally conscious products that are safer for your home, your neighborhood and the earth's environment. They also have information on why the products you may be using now are bad not only for the environment but for your own health as well. Also, check out their resources page for some fantastic links to information on environmental health, Hormone Disruptors, Safe/Non-Toxic Products, Green Building, Technical References for Toxic Chemicals, Multiple Chemical Sensitivities, Indoor Air Quality, and Recycling Gaiam They've bought up a bunch of the other companies that I used to shop from. I don't like Gaiam's overall look or feel (nor their prices... everything seemed to get more expensive) but if you can't find it anywhere else, look here. Recycled Plastics Marketing Close the loop by buying recycled products. EcoMall At the EcoMall we have made a commitment to the environment and the preservation of the Earth's natural resources. We offer the tools to help begin living a more environmentally-aware lifestyle.