Weekly Poll: Lyrical Cussing

Last year Andrew Beaujon published Body Piercing Saved My Life: Inside the Phenomenon of Christian Rock. I've only read the excerpt available on Amazon, which is linked in the title of this post. I should warn you first that page 2 of the excerpt reports on some lyrical content in Pedro the Lion's song "Foregone Conclusions." Yes- that "F-word" that doesn't fit any particular rhyme scheme in the song that I'm aware of.
The song is performed at the Cornerstone Festival; a days-long Christian concert not so unlike our beloved Spirit West Coast. The author, not a professing Christian, is on site as a reporter. His initial observations include Pedro's lead singer, Dave Bazan, "swilling from a milk jug full of vodka and water in defiance of the festival's no-alcohol policy." (Pg 1).
Beaujon also writes of his personal interaction with P.O.D. His observation of the band's lyrics keys into their desire not to shock anyone with foul language but to make the audience feel "comfortable"; whatever that means- not preached at, I guess.

Although Pedro the Lion has since split, for reasons unrelated to the Cornerstone event, and although it does not appear Pedro the Lion was ever a "Christian Rock Band," they were implicated in the book by their association with other bands at the concert.

Get Free Opinion Polls

Park Day!

Here are just a few pics from Park Day today. It was great to get out and enjoy the sunshine and spring weather.

Explicit: Loving Enemies

This morning Nancy reminded us about loving our enemies, and since Matthew 5:38-48 is a lengthy passage from the Sermon on the Mount perhaps we can continue to explore Jesus' words here on the blog.
I really appreciated the way Jesus' examples were given in light of the cultural background and the

Mosaic Law. I never knew backhanding someone was a deeply insulting gesture. I always thought it was worse than merely slapping because your hand gained momentum on the back swing and rendered more pain. I also never knew the background behind "the Roman mile" and why someone would force another to go a mile. It all makes sense now.

Here we see Jesus in the first half of this passage telling us not to retaliate against those who do us wrong. It is way too often that we see individuals behaving in an opprobrious manner and we vigilantly seek retribution ourselves because that person has to suffer for what they did. It's only fair, we tell ourselves.
The second half of the passage tells us to love and pray for our enemies. So not only are we to defy nature and restrain ourselves from offending the offender, now we're supposed to LOVE them and also PRAY for them? But prayer should be reserved as a solicitous effort for those we care about, we argue.
I must confess, I read this passage months ago and immediately a person came to mind that I would not consider an enemy per se. Enemy denotes other war terms for me; words like battle, fight, evil genius, constant threat, and also the ear-sharpening sound of clashing swords. But anyway, this person came to mind and I thought, yes, I'll pray for this person. So I prayed, "Looooorrrrd! I pray for [this person]...It's just...They're just so...so awful!!!"
I don't think that's what Jesus meant when he told us to pray for those who persecute us.
But it did allow God to at least crack open that part of my heart and I was eventually able to pray for the person without using insulting or reviling rhetoric. I'm still working on the loving part, but I haven't given up on that yet.
What we learn from this passage is that life is not fair. And should it be? God is just, but without forgiveness of sin and Jesus' death on the cross we are all hellbound. To some degree we have to crucify our selfish desires in order to know what love is. While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. And we think we can pick and choose those whom we love?

Dude....that's heavyyyy.

Weekly Poll: Global Warming?

Get Free Opinion Polls

Now available in RSS

Hate the word blog? You're not alone. I thought, "Maybe some people are reluctant to dialogue on this blog because they don't like the word 'blog'."
And then I thought, "Sacred Assembly readers are NOT so superficial that they let a teeny word like blog obstruct them. It's more likely they are preoccupied with March Madness at the moment."
So how 'bout we think of a new word for the blog. Something non-bloggy. This of course eliminates vlog and blideo. We do not have to marry two words together to name this thing.
(examples: Chill + Relaxed= Chilaxed...Air+ Bazooka=Airzooka)
Nor do we need to implement the ubiquitous acronyms that stymie an even flow of thought. LOL!!!
(h.t. Victoria)

In other news...
This little orange icon, found in the right margin, represents a link to RSS feed (Really Simple Syndication). If you subscribe (free, of course) you'll receive live blog updates, which means you won't have to memorize this site address, and you'll never miss a Sacred Assembly article again!

Now instead of torturing yourself trying to recall this blog's address, you can use more brain power trying to think of an alternative word for "blog".

Explicit: Our Words

This week's study on Matthew 5:33-37 is about keeping our word to God and to each other. But keeping our word is different than swearing by something we have no control over. These days we typically give our oath in the form of a contract or a collateral. Trusting someone to follow through with their actions seems foolish in a world where promises are broken constantly, whether purposely or accidentally.
Usually I assume everyone has my best interest in mind, which makes me vulnerable to pyramid schemes and armed robbery.
At work I sign and write agreements every day. When I agree to advertise with someone I will send a contract or sign theirs so three months from now there is proof of an agreement. There are some companies that require a signed contract every single time we make an agreement, even if I partner with them three or four times a month. This tells me they've been taken advantage of before, and they are willing to take any chances on me.
I once wrote a contract, signed it, sent it, recieved it with the other person's signature, and I noticed that they made a amendment to the contract without telling me. I was shocked that they would try to dupe me this way, and I informed the person that not only were their actions illegal but they had tarnished our business relationship and I was forced to terminate the contract altogether. Eventually that particular partnership regenerated itself, but only after I meticulously scrutinized every agreement that came through the fax machine.
Of course, not every broken promise is intentional. A few years back a close friend of mine was getting married. I offered to hire a budding photographer I knew from church as a wedding gift. The photographer gave me a huge discount as a favor and we verbally agreed I would make several payments.
By the time I paid off half the debt, Patrick was laid off from his job and we were struggling to make our bills. I let the photography debt slide for a few months until we had enough to pay the rest. My photographer friend was extremely gracious and understanding of our situation, but I knew he needed to pay his bills, too. I felt like I had taken advantage of him even with my good intentions.
Basically, what we learn from this passage in Matthew is that we need to do what we say we're gonna do, and we shouldn't have to swear by anything because
a) swearing on sweeping, grandiose forms of creation are not ours to swear by (they're already God's) and
b) Swearing by something shouldn't be necessary if we truly intend to follow through.
As Charlie reminded us this morning, our God is a God who keeps his promises, and we need to be people of our word.

Here's an uncomfortable article called "Not Getting Paid in the Worship Environment" by Jamie Rio. It touches on the issue of Christians taking advantage of each other by breaking oaths, and justifying it by using the "forgiveness" and "you can't sue me" card.

Weekly Poll: Spirit West Coast, Ya'll!

So lately I’ve been hearing a lot about Spirit West Coast. Like it or not, it’s semi-local and therefore harder to avoid. You have to admit, though, that the presence of a Christian-based Woodstock is somewhat intriguing. Instead of a crowd of dusty, sweaty, muddy people wandering and weaving, toppling over each other, and indulging on mass quantities of contraband, now we can watch a crowd of dusty, sweaty, muddy families wandering and weaving, shopping, and indulging on mass quantities of sugar and high-fat foods. Let’s make a three-day weekend of it!
I promised myself I would never return to SWC unless my favorite band Esterlyn (the now-defunct Grand Prize) would play there. When I made this flimsy promise, Grand Prize was but a local worship band that toured churches and mostly played at home in Boise.

Before Grand Prize morphed into Esterlyn, I used to email and beg them to come to Santa Cruz. I’ve left messages on their You Tube profile. I ordered multiple CDs by mail for friends and family, and with each order I wrote on the check “COME TO SANTA CRUZ- THIS IS NOT THE LAST YOU WILL HEAR OF ME!!!” I mean, who wouldn’t want to visit after a message like that? The lead singer, Luke Caldwell, responded once with a handwritten note inside a cd case: “Hey Jody! Thanks for your support! You rock! Love, Luke.”
Which satisfied me for a period. But no longer.
What will it take? I mean, what is it that I have to do to make them come out here??? And what were the chances that they would ever be invited to play at SWC/Woodstock 2007? So this week I checked their My Space page, as I do regularly, and what’s this? They’re coming to Monterey? Mmm. Not quite Santa Cruz, but we’re getting there. For the past two days I have wrestled with myself on this question: Do I or don’t I pay $100+ to finally see them play on California soil?

Spirit West Coast-
I've been to SWC one time, for one day, a few years ago. I got a vendor pass to sit at the Gospel For Asia booth and hock free books by K.P Yohannan at unassuming passers-by. You would be amazed by how many people are not only uninterested in receiving a free book, they are also very hostile towards the offer.
But anyway, I had some time to roam the grounds and see some bands play even though I only cared about seeing Third Day and Reliant K, who weren't playing that day. I can only describe the experience as miserable.

The booth next to us sold an incredibly inane invention called "Air-zooka!," which was basically spandex affixed to a tennis racket that you pulled back like a slingshot, which created a puff of air so heavy and fast it feels like you're getting thumped with a concrete object. Prospective buyers (mostly between the ages of 7 and 11) insisted on using us as targets.
It was hot. Vendors hollered at me like carnies from all directions. People stepped on my feet and snarled at me. Some littered. When Jeremy Camp was scheduled to perform I saw six girls tear off their Jesus sweatshirts and adjust their tight, cleavage-enhancing tube tops and pick lint from their belly button rings.
Boys whistled.
The books I handed out were about modern missions efforts and cutting back on unnecessary daily expenses. I was standing in the middle of a gypsy marketplace, trying to GIVE AWAY books on how to buy less stuff and no one would take them! I fancied myself a modern day prophetess, tempted to overturn tables and tear Jesus merchandise from hooks and then reduce the items to ashes with a single match.
Looking around me, it felt like I was stranded on a small island in the middle of a vast ocean, and the only available lifeboat had the letters WWJD printed in large block font, and I said to myself, "I'm not getting in THAT! I'd rather die of thirst on this island."
But then a tidal wave swelled and swept me from my perch in into view of Kirk Cameron. When Kirk appeared I became like those I harshly judged. While Kirk shared the Gospel from a sound stage inside a big tent I shifted restlessly in my seat and silently chanted, "Mike Seaver Mike Seaver Mike Seaver." When he ended his speech I stood and clapped and shouted "Woooo!" as if he just hit a high note on a Rascal Flatts cover song.
Later, after Jeremy Camp performed, Patrick and I rushed to the tent where he would be signing autographs- not because we wanted an autograph (pft-shaw!) but because Patrick and Jeremy know each other. While we waited behind a velvet rope, watching a Christian magazine writer interview him briefly, Patrick yelled "Jeremy!"
Mr. Camp glanced towards Patrick, his face lighting up in recognition and he pointed a sturdy index finger at Patrick. He mouthed the words, "YOU! Stay right there- I wanna talk to you!"
Patrick and I beamed and giggled, absorbing the glares and whispers of Jeremy's lowly fans the way sunbathers willfully absorb ultraviolet rays. After the mini-interview was over, Jeremy was whisked away by bodyguards, never given a chance to catch up with Patrick. He waved, though, and said "I'll be back! I'll be back!" and I wondered if we were supposed to wait there until then, because everyone knew he certainly would NOT be back.
Patrick and I became sullen and cranky. Nobody wanted our stupid free books. I had to convince Patrick that Jeremy did not "snub" him; he merely had places to be to promote himself and make more money for the record label. We continued to dodge onslaughts of air balls from the increasingly maddening Air-Zooka! camp until I grabbed two young boys by the collars and sent them away with an armload of free books to hand out to the passing river of people; people who I was convinced NEEDED to read this book more than ever.
By nightfall, we took another break and caught Toby Mac’s act on the main stage. Now, I would not call myself a fan of Toby Mac, but that guy knows how to put on a show. He is a showman. Such spectacle. Such pyrotechnics. Such break dancing. Patrick and I were mesmerized. One disgruntled lady squeezed past us and muttered, “I don’t care to see no Eminem wannabe…” which I thought was funny.

But over all, I can’t say I had a “good time.” So it’s very hard to convince myself it would be worth it to see Esterlyn for over a hundred bucks, when I know they are only going to play for like fifteen minutes, plus I saw them last September in Boise. And yeah, they were awesome, and yeah I’ve been waiting for them to come here, but I just don’t know if I can do it, you know?

Get Free Opinion Polls

Explicit: lust and marriage- by Charlie Broxton

In Matthew 5:31-32, Jesus has some pretty powerful words to say about divorce. Here’s what he says:
"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery."
I have to confess that this is a passage that I write about with great trembling and humility. Divorce is a complex and controversial issue. It is a cultural reality that causes great frustration and pain to those involved. John Stott in his commentary on the Sermon on the Mount says this, "There is almost no unhappiness so poignant as the unhappiness of an unhappy marriage." I agree completely with him. So I write keeping this in mind.
During the time of Jesus, there was a controversy about divorce between two Rabbinic schools. Rabbi Shammai took a very conservative approach saying that divorce was allowed only in cases where there was sexual immorality involved which could be authenticated by a witness. Most Jews of Jesus’ day, however, sided with the Rabbinic school of Hillel which stated that divorce was allowable for any cause of complaint, even including the wife burning dinner. In general, divorce was taken lightly and was a common occurrence in Jesus’ day.
In this passage and again in Matthew 19, Jesus sides neither with Shammai or Hillel in His view on divorce. And He gives His reason in Matthew 19:4-6:
"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."
Here Jesus goes back to creation to talk about the sacred nature of marriage. According to Jesus, marriage is not just a union of two people on paper confirmed by the state. It’s an exclusive and permanent union of two bodies and two souls for life. Jesus then goes on in Matthew 19:9 to say the same words that he said in Matthew 5:31-32:
"I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."
Jesus’ point is that when divorce happens, it results in adultery because we are dividing a union that God united. Divorce is not part of the Creator’s perfect design. It’s against God’s plan for marriage and so Jesus is saying that we should fight to maintain the sacred nature of marriage and avoid divorce at all costs.
I know as a pastor that there are always exceptions. A woman being abused by her husband is an example of one of those exceptions. The problem is that we often search for loopholes (like the Pharisees)—but according to Jesus’ teaching, the exceptions allowing for divorce are few and far between. I like the way pastor and scholar John Stott puts it. He writes,
"I’ve made the rule never to speak with anybody about divorce, until I have first spoken with him (or her) about two other subjects, namely marriage and reconciliation."

I think that there are many practical applications of this Biblical reality. Here are three:

For those of us who are married, we need to work hard at learning to love one another in the way that God calls us to and not consider divorce as an option. If that takes counseling (like it did in my marriage), so be it! The benefits are worth the intense work and commitment.

For those of us who are single, we must enter into marriage very carefully. It is not the answer to our loneliness and pain. Yes, it can be rich and wonderful but it takes a lot of work when it’s done God’s way. Choose your spouse very carefully and make sure they are willing to work through the tough issues.

For those of us who are divorced, the cross of Jesus is big enough to cover over everything and anything. The past is the past. We can move on into the future without shame or condemnation.

I would love to hear your ideas and thoughts on these passages. Feel free to respond.

-Charlie

Weekly Poll: You're Hired!

If you need a babysitter or some light housecleaning let Judy know about it (Judy@tlc.org). There are plenty of high school and college students looking to earn some money for the upcoming Isaiah Project (which I think means a Mexico trip and building houses and stuff).

You remember what it was like starting out on the workforce. Where did you begin?

Get Free Opinion Polls

Genesis Breakfast on Sunday! Holla!

Okay, I just used "holla" for the first time and I'm not liking it. That will be last time for me. I'm thinking I should delete that while I still can. But then again, others may learn from my mistake.

I am strenuously resisting the urge to backspace backspace backspace. I am also thinking of writing this entire post in the present tense. Stay with me, here.

On Sunday we are having breakfast together, which is something we sometimes do, and is really fun, plus the food is good and free. I am really looking forward to it!
Until then I am continuing to self-flaggelate while I consider the 4.5 years I spent at University, only to expand my lexicon with words like "holla!" and phrases like "that's pretty much how I roll."

ALSO: Sunday is Daylight Savings Time (begins), also known as The Worst Day of the Year. But I think if we huddle together we can make it through alright. Kind of like how some of us made it through "Batman Begins."

See you bright and earl[ier than usual] on Sunday!

Explicit: Anger

This week's topic from the Sermon on the Mount is Anger (Matthew 5: 21-26). Most of us have been brought up to believe that anger itself is a bad thing. But that's like saying modern technology is bad. Technology is just here; it's how we handle it that matters.
For example: last week Patrick accidentally backed my car into another car. Actually, he and the other lady backed into each other, which puts them both at fault. When Patrick called to tell me he had been in an accident, but everything was fine and no one was hurt, I was angry. I was angry at myself for letting him drive my car. I was angry with him for not seeing behind him. I was angry at the woman he collided with. I was angry at Jamba Juice for existing in that infernal parking lot on Clares Street. I was just mad.
Everyone around me at work overheard my end of the conversation.
"Hello?...What?...Ok good. How bad is it?...Is it a little scratch or a big scrath?...Are you trying to shield me from the magnitude of the damage? Because sometimes you do that...Well, I mean, when you say 'little scratch' I can imagine the bumper torn off and lying on the pavement. Is the bumper still attached to the car?...Did you call the insurance company?... Call the insurance company!"
When I hung up I was seething, but I wasn't sure how mad I should feel, so I wanted everyone to be warned.
Before anyone could inquire and therefore suffer my unquenchable wrath, I announced, "I don't want to talk about it. Nobody ask..."
The room went completely silent, until someone tried to break the tension. "I assume you mean you don't want us to ask about that phone conversation. The one that sounds like there was an accident. I guess that's what you mean when you say you don't want to talk, right?" I wanted to stand up, walk across the room, and punch this person in the face repeatedly. I'm just telling you this because there is always one person who tries to alleviate tension by stating the obvious, and my advice is that you strive very hard not to be that person.
It turns out (you've seen the pictures) that the scratch is very mild and the bumper is not only still attached, it is not even loose. So I'm really glad I did not conduct a nuclear experiment when it felt right to do so. Although at one point I heard myself say, "Patrick, I'm sorry. I'm not mad at you. I'm mad at the situation." And I felt like I had just graduated from Anger Management school. It felt really great to just...let go of it. Then we got some coffee and lived happily ever after.
What Jesus tells us in the passage we're looking at is that angry thoughts towards others is the same as murder, and unresolved anger is actually detrimental to our souls. Hoping something bad happens to someone is the opposite of God's character. Jesus is saying the only way to deal with anger is to deal with it. Be reconciled with one another, even if it means having to admit fault.
The woman Patrick bumped into in the parking lot was driving a heavily abused car. Nicks and dents covered the exterior, and it was clear she was no stranger to the occassional accident. At first she even laughed about the incident. "People are always running into this car!" She said. "So, Patrick, you're going to accept fault for this, right?" When Patrick said he would accept part of the fault but not 100%, the woman became irate and cussed and swore. She refused to accept any responsibility, even though there were witnesses willing to stick around for a traffic cop to swing by.
Immediately she jumped back into her car, offered a few choice words to Patrick and mentioned something about letting our insurance companies figure it out, and she tore out of the parking lot, nearly hitting other cars on her way out. It was clear to Patrick the woman was angry, and her badly dented car served as a metaphor for her life; always carrying around old wounds and placing 100% of the blame on others. Her anger was not immediately noticeable but was lying just below the surface. I really don't want to be like that, but I know I am just as prone to carrying anger with me as anyone else. And nobody suffers for it but me.

I do have some questions though pertaining to Bible translations. My Bible reads in verse 22, "But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment." And I'm wondering what that means, and why it is omitted from other translations. Is it too often used as a loophole for people who want to be angry at others? Is there some hidden meaning that I don't get? Also, the text alludes to "brother" as in a Christian brother, so does that mean this passage only applies to disputes between Christians? Does it really matter?