On the limits of prescience

“Daily Delivery” by Rob Gallop

Like many American boys my age, my first job was as a paperboy. For those who don’t know what that is, there used to be these things called newspapers that gave you all of yesterday’s news, and companies would hire local boys to hand deliver them to people’s houses. You could also buy a newspaper at a store, or through a machine that operated on the honor system, but many people, especially old and fat ones, preferred to have a boy deliver them to their doorstep so they wouldn’t have to actually get out of the house.

Anyway, every day I would get a stack of newspapers delivered to my house by a van-driving middle aged guy who had a, I don’t know, rapey quality about him. (I know, you’ve always wondered “Who delivers to the delivery guy?”). I would then put the newspapers into individual bags and proceed to drive my ten speed around town so people could finally figure out whether they won the lottery or which of their friends was arrested the night before. I did this every day, including Saturday and Sunday morning, for about two years. For all of this work, I was only paid $150 a month, plus tips. No one ever tipped me.

At the same time, I also fancied myself a bit of a writer. A science fiction and fantasy writer, no less. I imagined a future where I would live in New York, rich off of all my short story sales, drinking champagne every night and hanging out at a lot of coffee shops. Obviously, this was before the bottom fell out of the lucrative short fiction market; now, I only imagine living in Poughkeepsie and drinking Coke Zero.

All of this took place between 1992 and 1993, at the height of the Fab Five and right before internet access became commonplace. I was cutting my teeth on Frank Herbert, Robert A. Heinlein, Arthur C. Clarke, Alan Moore, Robert Jordan, and Neil Gaiman while enjoying the musical stylings of Nirvana and Public Enemy. Bill Clinton was playing the sax on the Arsenio Hall show and Michael Jordan was already the greatest basketball player of all time. This was when I was at my most naive and optimistic; in only a year, Kurt Cobain would kill himself and O.J. Simpson would drive a white Bronco down the highway, thus ending my extended childhood and thrusting me into the cynicism of late adolescence.

So, as I was delivering my newspapers, I had quite a bit of time to think. About an hour and a half every day. During that time I would write stories in my head, most of them sci-fi, and most of them very, very bad. I don’t remember most of the stories, but they were probably blatant ripoffs of popular stuff with a very obvious avatar of me as the protagonist. Oh, and I also probably was a ladies’ man, closely depicting reality.

One story that I do remember was decent, but made irrelevant by modern technology. The protagonist was a young paperboy in an isolated farming town who went from house to house with a 3.5” floppy disk (the things used before CDs and thumbdrives but which were not, in fact, floppy), loading the daily news into each home’s central computer. The character would ride his hoverbike to a house, insert the disk, enter his passcode, and upload the news; after upload, the family could read the news on any computer they had, as well as the TV and a tablet like device (the latter stolen from 2001: a Space Odyssey).

The paperboy, who was never given a name, grew tired of hearing all of the bad news. Day in and day out, he would read about war, rape, murder, famine, and even cyber attacks (which seem quite obvious considering everyone had an unsecured disk drive on the front of their house). The more he, and the town, knew about the world, the more depressed they became. So, in a fit of inspiration, the paperboy decided to rewrite the news to make it more upbeat. (It’s unclear whether cable TV existed in this world.) He wrote what he thought the news should be, making nations sign peace agreements and the murder rates drop precipitously.

Sure enough, the people of the village cheered up. They came out of their funk and started being nice to each other, organizing street fairs and festivals. Block parties were a weekly occurrence. Utopia was at hand. But, of course, that could not be. People from the government found out about the paperboy and tried to shut him down. They sent a new paperboy, a paperman, who delivered the real news while attempting to subvert the false news. The paperboy fought back but was, in the end, defeated by the government. The people, who probably knew the news was fake all along, went back into their black mood.

For a story written by a 13-year-old, The Paperboy wasn’t too bad. I’m sure it wasn’t original, and it certainly was inspired by Nineteen Eighty-Four and Pump up the Volume, but it was enough to earn me an A+ in Mrs. Williams’ English class. At the time that was all I really cared about. While I was hoping for a literary career, I was much too shy to actually show anyone but my teacher the piece. (NB: I’m still much too shy to show anyone my writings.)

As far as literary themes, the story isn’t too bad. It says a lot about the nature of the news and how we are being manipulated by what our newsmasters choose to tell us, as well as how knowledge does not always lead to enlightenment, sometimes it just leads to misery. This is one of the things I have always loved about Dune, and something that shows up quite a bit in my writing; a character seeks to learn a mystery, but upon learning it discovers the Pandora’s Box should never have been opened.

Another key element is the individual rebelling against the collective. This is quite a trope is sci-fi, especially dystopian fiction, but one that appeals to teenagers. I can imagine how pleased I was at writing about a character who was the only one to see the problem and who took it on himself to fix society’s problems. This is, of course, every teenager’s place in the world.

The ending, a dark bit of business that would characterize most of my stories, was more about my feelings of futility in the face of the adult world than anything. This Cassandra complex, of both seeing the future yet being unable to do anything about it, is perhaps a bit too biographical, but it does sum up how I felt at the time. (And often feel today.)

The problem with the story is not necessarily the plot or the characters, cliches and all, but with the treatment of technology. At 13, I could not imagine a world where the internet existed (although it did exist at that very moment) or where people had an abundance of choices for getting information. In the town I lived in, population 500 or so, not a single person had internet access. The library didn’t and the high school didn’t, nor would they for at least 5 more years. The only options for getting news were two out-of-town newspapers, one radio station, a few TV stations from 100 miles away, and, if you were lucky enough to have cable, CNN. Within that context, it made perfect sense that everyone could be fooled by fake news. I was constrained by what I knew, although I could have imagined greater.

Also, while the idea of someone physically uploading news to your home computer network is laughable today, at the time it made perfect sense. I remember sharing this revelation with my friends, who were certain something like that could never happen. There would always be newspapers, they assured me. Again, we were constrained by what we knew. I knew that one day digital news would replace paper news, but couldn’t imagine a scenario in which the bits would be delivered by wire instead of a person. I understand how stupid this is, since there were already technologies in place that did this very thing (computers, fax machines, telegraphs, etc), but at the time it was the only feasible solution. Also, I really didn’t want to lose my job.

The problem I had, one the affects even great writers, is that there is a limit to what I can imagine. For all of the iPads and cellphones that were predicted, there are tons of things that sci-fi writers just got plain wrong. How many stories had flying cars and ubiquitous jetpacks? How many movies and TV shows from the 90’s still had us using giant CRT monitors fifty years in the future? How many imagined the miniaturization of computers and the rise of mobile computing?

This limit to our prescience is nothing to be ashamed of. Storytellers are not in the business of predicting what will happen in the future, they are in the business of telling really good stories. You don’t read Dune to figure out how the Holtzman drive works, you read it to follow Paul on his journey. You don’t care that much of the hyper and warp drive stuff is crap, you just want the hero to rocket off into the stars. And in the case of my (terrible) story, it’s not important that the paperboy’s technology is outdated, what’s important is that he discovers the truth of knowledge.

John Scalzi’s theodicy

Redshirts by John Scalzi

Warning:spoilers for Redshirts follow

John Scalzi’s Redshirts is a novel with a familiar premise: what if the characters in a story realize they are, in fact, characters in a story? In this case, what if the (thinly veiled) redshirts from Star Trek, characters with whom the viewer is not familiar and who die a spectacular death, figure out they are characters in a pretty crappy TV show?

As far as premises go, this is quite familiar, as one of the characters even points out, but not necessarily bad. Scalzi, who wrote one of the best super-soldier-in-space novels1, takes something familiar and transforms it into an excellent book. Redshirts is, in parts, a meditation on free will, a theodicy, a love story, and one of the best books on writing you will ever read. It is that second part, the theodicy, that I’m interested in today.

A theodicy is an attempt to reconcile the existence of evil and human suffering with the omniscience, omnipotence and omnibenevolence of God.2 Within the world of Redshirts the characters recognize they are surrounded by misery and suffering, but only for a select few. The Captain and other senior officers are rarely affected (with the exception of the lieutenant who is constantly getting hurt only to quickly recover in time for the next away mission), but the lowly ensigns are dying in droves. What’s worse, these redshirts are dying for no good reason in increasingly bizzare ways. One is killed by ice sharks, the next by crazy robots who were given weapons, and another by sandworms that are clearly ripped off from Dune.

Needless to say, life for these characters is something of a hell, even if Scalzi fills the story with his charcteristic humor. They come to realize their lives are guided not by their own actions, or even the fate of a powerful deity, but by some hack writer who makes and breaks rules on a whim. A writer who kills anyone with an interesting back story for dramatic effect, to make an audience feel something right before a commercial break. They come to realize their lives are essentially meaningless, that they can and will be killed without a moment’s hesitation.

When the characters eventually face their creator (and of course they do), they confront him with their grim existence. They throw in his face that his lazy writing has actual consequences, that his use of tropes and shortcuts has ruined lives and is the cause for much suffering in the universe. The writer has no comeback, he lamely attempts to mount a defense, but even he knows it is futile. He is a bad writer who has never written anything good; he is a lazy creator and his creations are revolting.

Christians, when talking about the problem of evil, usually go to St. Paul’s letter to the Romans in defense of God. In the 9th chapter, Paul imagines a scenario where a human goes to God and asks “Why did you make me like this?” God’s response is to point out that he is the creator and has the right to do what he wants. But, Paul goes on, God does this for a reason, there is not a randomness to things but rather he is working things out to create for himself a people, the children of God.3 That’s all well and good if you have a benevolent god, but the characters here have probably the worst deity of all time.

So what do they do? In a dream (that may or may not actually be real), the characters appear to the writer and talk to him. All of the characters he has personally killed stand before him and give their demand: they want meaning to their lives. Their spokesperson says they don’t mind death and suffering, they recognize it as part of the universe, but what they don’t want is to die for no reason. They want their deaths to provide more than just a sense of danger for the Captain or to make the audience feel sad for all of 30 seconds. They want their lives to have real meaning and they want the writer to be the Creator he should be.

Ok, so there really isn’t a theodicy in Redshirts, at least not in the traditional sense. The characters want to figure out why their lives are full of suffering, but they don’t really need to reconcile that with a good god because they discover they don’t have anything like that. But in the end they come to a point where they want something like a theodicy: they want to reconcile their deaths with a larger purpose. They want meaning. Just like we all do.


  1. The best super-soldier-in-space novels, in order of greatness: Starship Troopers, Old Man’s War, The Forever War, and Armor
  2. The Wikipedia article is pretty good on this.
  3. The point of this is not to argue whether Christians are right on this count, merely to explain the most catholic theodicy.

The scapegoat in Benghazi

cc photo “Goat” by Edwin IJsman

On news that the United States ambassador to Libya was murdered, many are questioning how and why such a terrible thing could happen. Various answers have been put forth, ranging from the religious to the political, but each attempt merely looks at a single aspect of the killing, not the whole. In trying to come to a better understanding of the situation, I believe René Girard can be of some help.

Girard’s most famous theory, that of mimetic desire, says that we do not desire things simply because we desire them, but because others desire the same thing. We mimic those around us, which leads to violent impulses and the war of “all against all”.1

“The real source of victim substitutions is the appetite for violence that awakens in people when anger seizes them”

In many cases this mimetic desire results in the formation of an angry mob. “Every time you add one,” Girard has said, “the move towards the unity of the mob becomes faster, it has more power and attraction.” As more people join, as the media reports on it, as more people are talking about it the mob gains momentum.

At this point the violent impulses must be suppressed. A victim must be found and punished, what Girard calls the scapegoat2, an accessible target of the mob’s violence whose death (or expulsion) restores balance to the community. The scapegoat is not referred to as such, in the eyes of the mob it is the actual source of the problems, because the larger object of violence is often unreachable.

In I See Satan Fall Like Lightning (chapter 12), Girard says:

The real source of victim substitutions is the appetite for violence that awakens in people when anger seizes them and when the true object of their anger is untouchable. The range of objects capable of satisfying the appetite for violence enlarges proportionally to the intensity of the
anger.

In the case of the riots in Libya, could we say the American embassy was the scapegoat? The rioters, angry over blasphemy against Muhammad, saw America as the enemy but could do little against a far away nation. The ambassador and embassy building represent America and are therefore suitable outlets for violence.

The root cause is our innate brokenness and desire to blame the Other

This seems to be at the root of the type of violence we see in Egypt and Libya. Sure, we can look at religious answers or we can look at the geo-political issues surrounding the violence, but neither of those go deep enough. The root cause is our innate brokenness and desire to blame the Other and restore harmony to our community.

Finally, I think it would be good to caution against creating a scapegoat of our own in our desire to understand this. We can look at someone like Terry Jones, who enjoys inciting religious violence, and label him a crazy. Because we only are interested in self-righteous condemnation, he and his small group of followers thus become our scapegoat. Ultimately, we haven’t actually moved forward.

Update: This post was written immediately after the attack, before all of the details were known. It is now clear this was an intentional attack, not a spontaneous one. The point still stands, I believe, no matter what the impetus for the attack.
 


[1]: I am indebted to John H.’s post at Curlew River here.

[2]: For the Christian, or anyone familiar with the Hebrew Scriptures, the scapegoat is a familiar idea. See Leviticus 16.

Another Study in Contrasts: Thomas Merton and Tim Tebow

If you are an evangelical right now, you DESPERATELY want to be Tim Tebow.

Tim Tebow is currently the quarterback for the Denver Broncos (or rather–was the quarterback for the Denver Broncos.  Now that the Broncos have signed Peyton Manning, it is yet to be determined which team Tebow will play for in the future).  He attracted lots of attention nationally when he stepped up as the starter this year and led Denver to several wins and a strong showing in the playoffs.

Tim Tebow played quarterback at Florida from 2006 to 2009.  He helped lead Florida to two national championships in those years, and he captured the hearts and imaginations of people throughout the Southeast–Florida fans or not–through his nice guy demeanor.

Evangelicals have fallen head over heels in love with Tim Tebow.  Why?  Because he is successful–and he is unabashedly one of us.  He is someone in the public eye whom we can point to and say, “Look!!!  It works!!!  We’re right!!!  We win!!!”

Evangelicals are completely and totally infatuated with this sort of celebrity–the more public the better, and the more outspoken about his faith, the better.  The current Jeremy Lin lovefest is a case in point.

I could say a lot of things about this sort of celebrity, the long and short of it would be to say that it is completely and totally overrated by evangelicals.  But I won’t.  Instead I will direct your attention to a different sort of Christian celebrity.  If you paid attention to the title of this post, you know where I am going here.

Thomas Merton was a Christian, just like Tim Tebow.  Like Tebow, he was very well-known and had tremendous influence both in Christian culture and in the outside world when he was at the peak of his fame.  Like Tebow, he was very public about his faith and how his faith informed his life.

But once you get past these things, you will see that there is a world of difference between Thomas Merton and Tim Tebow.

Merton was a writer.  He wrote voluminously and deeply on the inner life.  As a monk, he had tremendous amounts of time to mine the inner depths of his being.  He desired to see all believers become attuned to the inner depths of their beings and not settle for living life on the surface.  He raved constantly against the “false self” that so many live with, an illusory person who desires to exist outside the reach of God’s love–ergo, outside of reality and outside of life.

But so much of evangelicalism–and especially the celebrity culture that evangelicalism loves to look up to–exists on the surface.  So much of the hype about Tebow and Jeremy Lin has to do with external activities and external commitments.  Tebow may have a very rich inner life just like Thomas Merton.  But if he does we don’t know.  And in the present evangelical milieu, it just doesn’t matter.  All we care about is what this guy believes–or at least professes to believe, what he does on Sunday morning, and what he does during his summers.  And the fact that he is a successful NFL quarterback–AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And that’s really all we care about.  We don’t care to hear what he would say about the state of his soul, or the state of our own souls.  We don’t care to hear any critique Tim Tebow would make–if he were ever inclined to make such a critique–of our false selves and our propensity to live on the surface and idolize the superficial.  And that is only to our detriment.

God is in the Manger

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
(Hebrews 1:1-3 ESV)

There will likely be a Christmas party or get-together of some kind at your place of work.  Every church, Sunday School class and public school will have something to attend at this very special time of year.  There is family to visit and food to prepare.  I keep hearing “It’s the most stressful time of the year.”  Even if you’re keeping the Christ in Christmas there is so much to be distracted by.  There is peace and joy as the angels visit the shepherds.  The wise men brings precious gifts.  Our hearts go out to Joseph and especially Mary as they make their pilgrimage in faith to Bethlehem.  It is a tender, precious story of God’s love for mankind.  But don’t forget to look in the manger.

It’s not just a story of an unwed mother being particularly blessed.  The birth of Jesus is the beginning of heaven touching earth.  Hebrews 1 is at the top of the page; take a look at Philippians 2 and Colossians 1.  That’s not just a baby in the manger, that’s God.  Jesus said that he and the Father are one. Isaiah prophesied his name would be called “Wonderful counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”  Jesus is God, God is Jesus.  He left heaven to come here and do this.  When we could not come to God, he came looking for us.

If there is anything in your manger other than God himself, it’s time to re-evaluate.  He is not just bringing peace, he is our peace.  Emmanuel means God with us.  He is near; he is here.  God is in the manger.  This is good news for all people.

Happy Thanksgiving

"Cornucopia", CC photo by brownpau


Almighty God,
Father of all mercies,
we your unworthy servants give you humble thanks
for all your goodness and loving-kindness
to us and to all whom you have made.
We bless you
for our creation, preservation,
and all the blessings of this life;
but above all for your immeasurable love
in the redemption of the world
by our Lord Jesus Christ;
for the means of grace, and for the hope of glory.
And, we pray,
give us such an awareness of your mercies,
that with truly thankful hearts
we may show forth your praise,
not only with our lips, but in our lives,
by giving up ourselves to your service,
and by walking before you
in holiness and righteousness all our days;
through Jesus Christ our Lord,
to whom, with you and the Holy Spirit,
be honor and glory throughout all ages.
Amen

For All the Faithful Departed

In paradisum deducant te Angeli; in tuo adventu suscipiant te martyres, et perducant te in civitatem sanctam Ierusalem. Chorus angelorum te suscipiat, et cum Lazaro quondam paupere æternam habeas requiem.

May angels lead you into paradise; upon your arrival, may the martyrs receive you and lead you to the holy city of Jerusalem. May the ranks of angels receive you, and with Lazarus, the poor man, may you have eternal rest.

But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who have died, so that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have died. For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will by no means precede those who have died. For the Lord himself, with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call and with the sound of God’s trumpet, will descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage one another with these words. –St. Paul, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18

For All The Saints

For all the saints, who from their labours rest,
Who Thee by faith before the world confessed,
Thy Name, O Jesus, be forever blessed.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

Thou wast their Rock, their Fortress and their Might;
Thou, Lord, their Captain in the well fought fight;
Thou, in the darkness drear, their one true Light.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

For the Apostles’ glorious company,
Who bearing forth the Cross o’er land and sea,
Shook all the mighty world, we sing to Thee:
Alleluia, Alleluia!

For the Evangelists, by whose blest word,
Like fourfold streams, the garden of the Lord,
Is fair and fruitful, be Thy Name adored.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

For Martyrs, who with rapture kindled eye,
Saw the bright crown descending from the sky,
And seeing, grasped it, Thee we glorify.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

O blest communion, fellowship divine!
We feebly struggle, they in glory shine;
All are one in Thee, for all are Thine.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

O may Thy soldiers, faithful, true and bold,
Fight as the saints who nobly fought of old,
And win with them the victor’s crown of gold.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

And when the strife is fierce, the warfare long,
Steals on the ear the distant triumph song,
And hearts are brave, again, and arms are strong.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

The golden evening brightens in the west;
Soon, soon to faithful warriors comes their rest;
Sweet is the calm of paradise the blessed.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

But lo! there breaks a yet more glorious day;
The saints triumphant rise in bright array;
The King of glory passes on His way.
Alleluia, Alleluia!

From earth’s wide bounds, from ocean’s farthest coast,
Through gates of pearl streams in the countless host,
And singing to Father, Son and Holy Ghost:
Alleluia, Alleluia!

By William Walsham How.

The Gospel According to Allegory

In a second-grade Sunday School class, the students are told to guess what is being described.  “It has brown fur, a bushy tail, climbs trees…”  Finally a student shyly responds “I know it has to be Jesus, but it sure sounds like you’re talking about a squirrel.”

There is so much analogy, metaphor and allegory in and out of scripture that I’m having a hard time deciding where to start.  The Bible is rich in symbolism and imagery.  Let’s start with something simple in the Old Testament.  When the camp of Israel was being plagued by snakes, Moses was told to fashion a brass serpent and place it on top of a pole.  If anyone was bitten by a “fiery asp” all he had to do was look at the pole and live.  The serpent on the pole is a metaphor for Jesus.  We are all bitten by sin.  (Serpent, Eden, see how many levels this works on?)  We will die if we do not look to Jesus on the cross.  Jesus himself even says that as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up.

That’s an easy one to follow.  I contend that everything in Judaism is about Jesus – Moses leading the Hebrews out of slavery, through the wilderness and entering the promised land; the Passover; circumcision; Adam; the alter, temple, and high priest.  I could go on.  The events of the Old Testament are historical facts and help us to understand New Testament theology.  By understanding the role of the high priest we can better understand what Jesus does as he continually goes into God’s presence to intercede on our behalf.  But you don’t have to take my word for it.

The Apostle Paul refers to two sons of Abraham, one by Sara and the other by Hagar.  Paul recounts the history and explains that the events may be interrupted allegorically.  (Galatians 4:24)  So the Old Testament is metaphorical for the New.  What about Jesus’ use of symbolism?  Over and over he draws comparisons to what the Kingdom of God is like.  It’s like a collector searching for pearls; it’s like a woman that looses a gold coin; it’s like planting a field; it’s like the return of the Prodigal, and so forth.  Jesus is like a shepherd, except when he is like a sheep.  We are all like sheep that have gone astray, unless we’re fishers of men.  Or fish.

Can you remember the first time you saw The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe?  Did you realize it was about anything other than a magical land with talking animals?  I wonder what C.S. Lewis would think about Veggie Tales.  So what’s the point of all this?  We are finite in our understanding.  God cannot simply come right out in the Bible and tell us what he is thinking.  Even if we understood our tendency is to disbelieve.  We – collective, human-kind we – often have to be told things again and again.  So stories and themes are repeated, many times.  Jesus is a burning bush, and a sweet branch that makes water potable, and a serpent on a pole, et. al.  God’s kingdom is like a little child on Jesus’ lap.  The church is the body of Christ, or else the bride of Christ.  Why?  Because we need the symbols and pictures to even hope to understand.  We cannot understand God otherwise.  He loved us while we were unlovable, enough to send his only Son.  Jesus loved the same way, enough to not only die but suffer abuse, torment and the cross.  It just doesn’t make sense.

Our minds are small.  Like a child that hasn’t learned to read, we open the Bible and look at the pictures.  (See what I did there?)

A Reflection on the Post-Evangelical Wilderness and That Rob Bell Book

I am going to make an assumption that the audience over here at Life in Mordor has at least a nodding familiarity with the kind of blogs where I hang out regularly.  In which case, you are probably familiar with the term “post-evangelical wilderness”.

For me, the “post-evangelical wilderness” is not some idle theoretical construct created by bloggers with WAY too much time on their hands and nothing better to do with it except sit there all day in front of their computer screens and write whatever strikes their fancy.  For me, the “post-evangelical wilderness” is real life.  It’s where I live, and it is where I have lived for the better part of the previous decade.

The dominant feeling in my life these days is a malaise caused by cognitive dissonance:  Evangelicalism is my home.  But because evangelicals are madly insistent upon embracing the worst aspects of low-brow American pop culture while doing the exact same stupid crap the mainlines were doing a few decades back that put them on a beeline toward complete and utter irrelevance, I am no longer at home in evangelicalism.

Why not convert? you say.  I grew up in the Catholic Church, and I have several Catholic family members about whom I care very deeply who would love to see me “come home” to the Catholic faith.  Also, I have been reading Lutheran blogs and listening to Lutheran podcasts lately, and I am finding that they express the Gospel in very compelling ways.

But I am not entirely convinced that another conversion experience is what I need at this point in my life.  It would be nice to have a conversion story to tell, to be able to tell a tale of having wandered for so long out in the post-evangelical wilderness before finally coming into my new spiritual home.  It would be nice to be able to enter into my new spiritual home and tell my conversion story loudly and proudly.  Maybe I could write a book about it.  Maybe I could do book signings.  Maybe I could go on the speaking circuit and make obscene amounts of money.  Maybe.

But conversion envy is a very dangerous thing.  Being pimped by some other Christian tradition as their poster child is hopelessly overrated–even if you get a book deal out of it and get famous and make crazy amounts of money along the way.

Besides, as I progress in this post-evangelical journey, I am finding that my heroes aren’t necessarily the people with an awesome conversion story to tell, like Francis Beckwith or Franky Schaeffer.  I am finding that my heroes are people like Thomas Merton, who sought to learn all he could about what monasticism looks like in other world religions and apply it to his own context as a Trappist monk in Kentucky.  Or J. I. Packer, a well-respected conservative evangelical writer and thinker who served as an Episcopal bishop for several years.  He sought to work with people, even those whom he thought were crazy, to work within structures that were already in place, to win people over with gentleness and respect, and to be a positive force for the change he wanted to see in his denomination.  He is no longer an Episcopal bishop; I believe they finally excommunicated him a year or two back.  But he stayed and dialogued and worked patiently, even as his whole denomination was throwing itself headlong over the cliff.  They had to run him off.

So I am not convinced that what I need at this point in my life is another conversion experience.  Rather, I think that what I need is to figure out a way to take the best parts of Catholic and/or Lutheran belief and practice and apply them to my own present context.

Recently one of my friends put up a post on her wall on Facebook which summarized her frustrations with the new Rob Bell book.  (Those of you who don’t know which one:  What rock have you been living under the last six months???)  A lot of the responses to this post were back-slapping type responses which flippantly denounced the ideas in this book.  I did not enter into this discussion, except to venture that Bell is asking questions that need to be asked and that we are foolish to dismiss them as out of hand.

I won’t get into my own thoughts on the Rob Bell book.  I have written extensively about them over at my own blog.

As I read through this conversation, I wanted to grab these people and shout in their faces that the whole thing was a MASSIVE EXERCISE IN COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT!!!!!!!!!!  Then I remembered:  These people are my friends.  They are part of a community of believers that has been very good to me over the years.  I would be a fool to throw that away lightly.  Besides, these are people for whom Christ died, just as much as me.  Surely I can afford to show them grace by restraining myself.

This is an illustration of the conflict that is inside of me as I pass through the post-evangelical wilderness.  It would be nice to be part of a community of believers and friends who are all on the same journey as me.  But such people are VERY hard to come by here in the heart of the Bible Belt, so I need to accept and live and work within such community as I can find.  This community has its foibles and troubles, but it has been very good to me over the years and I am a fool to throw that away lightly.