« free music
low standards »

superb owl

posted by adam on 02.11.2007 at 1:50 pm

The only part of the Super Bowl I watched was the halftime show. It was interesting, mostly because I’m not familiar with Prince’s music, but he is clearly a man with a lot of talent. And a lot of guitars.

I didn’t watch the game because, frankly, I’m not into sports. I never have been. I enjoy playing sports, but not watching them. This can create odd situations for me here in Texas, where football is religion. Recently I was speaking to a group of church people and confessed that I don’t like sports. I was booed. By the church people. Booed.

I don’t get it. I don’t run around trying to make everyone else like what I like. That would be very narrow-minded and kind of stupid. We don’t all like the same things. My not liking sports is not a comment on my sexual orientation or my relationship with my father. I just find them boring.

It has taken me the better part of my three decades to become comfortable admitting that I don’t like sports. Given the way people react, it’s no wonder. Reading Anne Lamott here lately, marveling at the wonder of a former alcoholic, former drug user, cussing Christian female writer, I have begun to realize just how brainwashed I’ve been most of my life. Hell, I worry about what people will think all the time.

Take my use of the word “hell” in that last sentence. Among the people I grew up with, good, solid fundamentalists, cussing (even the “h-word”) is very much frowned upon. But I use strong words when I get mad. I do. I don’t use expletives in place of adjectives because I think that makes you sound stupid, but not really because I find it terribly offensive. I’m supposed to find it offensive. I used to be a minister, for crying out loud—I have to find it offensive. But I don’t.

I worry that no church will ever hire me again if I use that kind of language in my writing, (assuming I’m insane enough to ever want to work for a church again.) I worry that people might not use my Bible study materials or invite me to speak because they are afraid I “send the wrong message.” I get nervous that even my friends and family will hold me at arm’s length, shaking their heads and clicking their tongues as if to say, “We always wondered about that one.”

I should be more worried about being real, being genuine.

Screw it. Who cares what everyone thinks, right? I’m not here for you. I’m devoted to Jesus and I’m not going to live my life worrying that my devotion won’t look like what someone else thinks it should. I’m just going to be real.

If you don’t like that, you are more than welcome to go read some other blog.

posted by adam on 02.11.2007 at 1:50 pm

18 responses to “superb owl”

You got booed in church? Amazing. I mean, that has to be some kind of record or something.

left by Mike F. on 02.11.2007 at 5:16 pm

In fairness to the folks that booed me, I think it was mostly good-natured teasing. Though I did sense a mild degree of what-in-the-world?-ism as many of the folks I was speaking to are, in one way or another, heavily involved in football programs.

It was like what I imagine telling a group of teachers that you think learning is dumb would be like. They weren’t ready to flog me or anything, but they didn’t understand, either.

left by adam on 02.11.2007 at 7:19 pm

I completely understand. I once told a room full of Texas baptists that I was from Michigan; there was a palpable sense of unease after that. :)

left by Mike on 02.12.2007 at 12:01 pm

i once made an announcement in acu chapel for a meeting of the acu college democrats and was booed for real. no teasing. wayne barnard said it was the first time he’d ever seen that happen.

i also preached a sermon once, to a group of parents, about how high school sports can distract from more important things. you should have seen the blank stares.

left by Kester Smith on 02.12.2007 at 2:09 pm

Mike, okay, that’s entirely believable and kind of funny.

Chris, I wish I could say I was surprised by that…but here in the Bible belt you almost aren’t a Christian if you’re not a card-carrying republican. I and don’t criticize that to say that I am a democrat. I’m neither, really. I’m into truth and helping people, but my point is that we are often so very (1) narrow-minded and (2) cruel.

And by “we”, I mean people, not just Christians.

left by adam on 02.12.2007 at 4:17 pm

By the way, I evidently erased the first post of this article and in doing so also erased a couple of comments.

Trey said:

You know this won’t come as a surprise coming from me, and I generally agree with the previous comment. Your post is understandable, and in general, laudable. Worrying about what other people think is a waste of time, a lesson I’ve learned and continue to learn.

I’m not sure if you were intending to communicate this or not, but it sounds as if you also don’t really care what others think. And this is where I would draw a line. Caring what others think and how our actions affect them is a foundation of all community, including Christian community. Identifying what feelings in others we are responsible for and what feelings we are not responsible for is an ongoing process requiring constant wisdom and discernment.

Having said that, I would also point out that purpose and vision–in the Christian’s case, discipleship–is a far more important element of the Christian common life. It’s not only possible to have both a passionate personal pursuit of Jesus and a genuine concern for the feelings of others, it’s necessary.

In response, I would say this:

I am not responsible for what other’s feel. Sure, I can contribute to someone’s feelings for the better or for the worse, but how a person feels is something they (and they alone) are responsible for. Not me.

In this time when political correctness rules, I believe we care far too much about how others feel. Frankly, I don’t see the same hyper-concern for the feelings of others in Jesus’ ministry. He cared a great deal for people. Not so much for their comfort. He was always making people uncomfortable, especially those he was close to. And this was not by design, per se. He wasn’t trying to rattle cages. That’s just the effect light tends to have on dark places.

He did a lot of things “the wrong way”. Like breaking some of the more picky points of the law, working on the Sabbath in particular. And he used offensive language. (Doesn’t come through in your NIV, but it’s there in the Greek.) God has always been an outside-the-box thinker, and never one to take on blame for making his people or any people feel uneasy, uncomfortable or even offended.

I’m not on a quest to upset people. But I’m no longer on a quest to appease them, either. You (Trey, or anyone else) don’t have to agree with me. The fact is, it really won’t change how I feel. I care a lot about people and I am committed to people, but I am not committed to making people feel good. I have found that to be mostly counter-productive, largely dishonest and nearly always a waste of time.

left by adam on 02.12.2007 at 4:28 pm

Another deleted comment.

Jeb wrote:

I agree with you to a point, but it’s also wise to choose the battles worth fighting. For me, this would not be one of them. I would offend more people than I would help, and for what? So I can use stronger lanaguge? It just wouldn’t be worth it. Like it or not, as salt and light, we sometimes must avoid the appearance of evil, especially on non-critical issues.

Oh, and I LOVE the typo in your title.

My response:

The title: not a typo.

The battle: not one I’m fighting. In fact, that is the point. I will talk, act, live as I do. I don’t feel the need to defend it. Hey, if you find the word “crap” offensive, man, I’m going to try to avoid using that word around you. But if you find the word “crap” offensive, don’t come reading my blog. I type a lot of crap here. A lot.

I have grown up with this mold, if you will, of the good little conservative Christian, and it’s like a suit that doesn’t fit anymore. I’m not comfortable in it. And I don’t think I have to be. I’m not knocking people who still wear that style. It’s just not who I am any more, and I don’t feel like pretending.

There’s a lot more to that, obviously. Maybe this should be my next post…

left by adam on 02.12.2007 at 4:34 pm

I guess it’s just a little difficult from this post to see exactly what you mean and where you are coming from. I’m all for breaking down the conservative Christian stereotypes and molds in order to live a more authentic Christian walk that is a real source of light and hope in this world. In doing so, you will certainly offend people, and that’s fine. What I’m not fine with is simply getting so angry and frustrated with the church that you become self-righteous and become almost intentionally offensive for no good reason. I’m not accusing you of doing this. I simply don’t know. I just know that you’ve been through enough bad experiences with churches that I could see this as an understandable reaction, and both your post and your response sounded a little on the defensive side (I never said I found “crap” offensive). It is important that we model ourself after Christ rather than simply trying to be what someone else isn’t. There’s a fairly well-known emergant church leader named Brian MacLaren who has a lot of good ideas and reaches a lot of difficult to reach people, but he also makes a point of using offensive language. What he views as a freedom and a breaking down of traditional Christion molds comes across simply as arrogance and immaturity and needlessly hurts his credibility. He doesn’t need to do that to be effective in his ministry, and it’s likely he would make greater progress changing the minds of conservative Christians on important issues of ministry were he not to choose to fight that battle. When I read your post, that’s what came to mind, and maybe I’m seeing something that’s not there.

left by Jeb on 02.13.2007 at 3:40 am

Jeb, I will write more on this.

Just a quick question for tonight: In your response you assert that Brian MacLaren might be more effective if he avoided offensive language. More effective to whom? Christians? Or the non-Christians he’s reaching out to? Do you really think people are reluctant to consider Jesus because of MacLaren’s language? Or do you think it’s more likely that conservative Christians are uncomfortable, regardless of who MacLaren’s reaching?

left by adam on 02.13.2007 at 7:40 pm

Why does it have to be an either or? As Christians, we are called not only to reach the lost but to strive for harmony within the church. In most cases, those affiliated with the emergant church movement are among the first to embrace the idea, and I feel a strong connection with them at many levels. We should not pursue unity at any price, certainly, but some issues are more important than others, and sometimes we compromise or even sacrifice smaller things in order to achieve something greater. An example from my own life would be alcohol in North Carolina. The church I served in there was extremely legalistic, which was the cause of my eventual leaving. I see nothing wrong with having a little lacohol to drink, but to the leaders in the church with whom I was engaged in a serious theological/philosophical struggle, it was a sin. Now I could certainly assert my freedom in christ and drink in public anyway, but that would be a barrier to them hearing anything else I say. For that reason, I chose not to drink in upblic, though I had every right to do so, because it would hurt my ability to fight a greater battle.

Using offensive language is another one of these “stumbling block” issues. Why do it? You asked if believe that people do not come to Christ due to MacLaren’s language, and I would answer probably not. But I would also ask if that language contributed to anyone coming to Christ. Personally, I find that highly unlikely, and if that is the case, then what exactly is the point?

I had a seminary professor tell me one time that “the gospel is offensive, but we must never be.” I think there is a lot of truth in that statement. If we are authentic followers of Christ, we will offend many, but it must be Christ in us that does the offending rather than we ourselves. We must never allow trivial matters about ourselves to become an obstacle to ministry, be it to believers or unbelievers. MacLaren is a leader. He writes book intentionally challenging the conservative church in key areas. He is very often right, and the conservative church needs to listen. What is exciting is that I see a lot of evidence that this is actually happening on a fairly large scale. But is it possible that a he causes some who might be open to his message to immediately tune him out due to his lanague? I think absolutely yes, and by imposing his freedom in Christ he may actually hinder unity in the church.

Paul said “All things are permissible for me, but not all are profitable.” If we are going to offend, it better be for the right reasons, and simply imposing our freedom because we stop caring about what a segment of Christianity thinks is not a very good reason, in my opinion.

Sometimes taking up our own cross involves curtailing our rights and freedom for the greater work of the kingdom, and Jesus certainly modeled that truth well.

left by Jeb on 02.13.2007 at 10:19 pm

Clearly, we disagree. I respect you, Jeb—you are a good man and a friend, but we do not see eye-to-eye here.

I’m afraid that introducing one concrete example, that of language, has made the discussion far more pointed than can be profitable. Perhaps offensive language is ugly. But there are far uglier things that find a welcome home in the hearts of believers. Things like pride, arrogance, jealousy, conceit, judgment, hate, blood-lust and materialism. While I certainly take you seriously as you are a long-time friend of mine, I find it very difficult to take seriously the legalistic preferences of others who will squabble over my use of a four letter word but tolerate these greater evils in their own lives, even passing them off as virtues at times.

Brother, that is messed up.

I’m not saying you do this. But (in my humble opinion), you have blinders on here. Many of the prophets, apostles and even Christ himself used language that would be regarded as “cussing” by today’s standards. Jesus used an offensive Greek word (kunarivoi) meaning “little dog” (or, more accurately translated into our lingo, “little bitch”) when speaking to the Syrian Phoenicia woman in Matthew 15:26 and Mark 7:27. The word translated as “rubbish” in Philippians 3:8 (skubalon) literally means “excrement of animals” (or “dog/horse/bullshit”). Jeremiah accused God of “raping” him, metaphorically. (The Hebrew word used in Jeremiah 20:7 literally means “deceived” or “enticed” and referred specifically to deception of an intimate nature.)

How’s that for offensive?

I’m not arguing for my right to use off-color language or my freedom to do anything. I belong to Jesus—I don’t really think I have a whole lot of freedom. My point is that there is a need to be real, to be genuine. I happen to think that our mutual pussy-footing around gets us nowhere, and fast. We’re so worried about offending one another over language, entertainment choices, worship styles, beverage options, theological minutia—it’s no wonder a lot of folks just pass on the whole church thing. It’s kind of a train wreck.

Community should be more real than that. What happens if someone shows up at your church who smokes? Who cusses? Who’s missing most of their teeth? Who’s clearly an illegal alien? Who doesn’t know the secret handshake, but genuinely wants to meet Jesus?

There has got to be something more worth fighting for than these petty battles.

And if you disagree with me, hey, that’s cool. That’s fine by me. I can respect that. Please also respect that I disagree with you.

left by adam on 02.13.2007 at 11:49 pm

If a person shows up at church doing any of those serious things you mentioned, we will embrace him or her. We’re not talking about those who come seeking God, for indeed Christ calls us to come as we are. We don’t clean ourselves up first. No, we’re talking about those who would reach out to them. You are right that there is utter hypocrisy on the conservative Christian side on many issues. I see that as clearly as you do. It grieves me, and in my own way I am trying to do something about that within my sphere of influence inside a fairly conservatice church. And it IS having an impact. Students are really starting to think about these things and make different choices than their parents. But if I decided that, do to the hypocrisy I see in the church, I should stop caring what they think and use four letter words, you know as well as I do what would happen. First, parents would not let their students come, and second, I would be fired. Is is worth that, or is it better to stay where I can make a difference?

I also agree with you that it is detrimental for Christians to get bogged down over issues like this, which is why I would say to the Brian MacLaren’s of the world, stop being needlessly offensive and pushing this issue in other Christians’ faces, and to the conservatives I would say, lighten up, there are bigger issues. I we REALLY cared about one another and humbled ourselves, then both sides would and should do some very small things to work together better and be stronger as a result.

Every missionary understands that they must understand the culture they are in, in part to avoid doing something offensive that would hurt their ability to convey the gospel. Often these “offences” are purely cultural and are not wrong in and of themselves, yet they are still significant. Much of the church, as you’ll no doubt agree, is actually a mission field, so I think we need to take these things seriously in order to be effective. And that’s really the issue for me. It’s not caring what others think so much as it is being sensitive to a certain culture. A fine line maybe, but I believe it’s an important one.

left by jebbarr on 02.14.2007 at 10:39 am

Jeb, as usual, you make some fine points. (And I mean that—intelligent, relevant and insightful.)

In your context, I agree, you have little choice but to regulate your language and behaviors or risk losing your job. Of course, Mike Yaconelli, a far wiser man than me, once argued that any youth minister who really does his/her job will be fired. Churches won’t tolerate it. I don’t say that to say that you should risk your job for the sake of a four letter word. I say that to say that anyone who works in professional ministry works under fire, more from within the church than from without. I know of plenty of ministers who were fired for doing the right (but very unpopular) thing.

And this raises a good point. Just because people don’t like something (or find something offensive) does not mean we should curb our behaviors, attitudes or theology to match what might be more pleasing. No, we shouldn’t go around trying to offend others and there is some degree to which we should be sensitive, but not overly so. I’m not devoted to popular opinion. I’m devoted to Jesus.

One last thing: the length of these comments alone shows just how conservative our roots are. I really don’t think most people care. While there are plenty of people out there who are not Christians because they have been around church folks who were mean, spiteful, gossips, liars, proud, jealous or arrogant, I have never heard of anyone saying, “Well, I would be a Christian if it hadn’t been for that time I heard Phil say ‘shit’.”

left by adam on 02.14.2007 at 12:25 pm

I don’t think we’re terribly far apart on this. We agree in principle, but it seems that you’re willing to take it a little further than I’m comfortable. As I’ve said, and this will be my last point on the subject, my bigger concern is creating further division over a silly issue, not how my language is viewed by a non-Christian.

On a lighter note, even if I agreed with you 100%, it wouldn’t matter. Stephen just turned 2 1/2, and he learnes two or three new words a day by simply repeating me. Unfortunately,
I don’t get to choose which two or three words he decides to repeat, and that’s a little scary sometimes &especially whn “Star Wars” is among his first fifty words.

left by Jeb on 02.14.2007 at 2:00 pm

Good point. There are all kinds of reasons for carefully picking your words!

left by adam on 02.14.2007 at 2:04 pm

Well, let me just be a spell-check and say that it is Brian McLaren. And he is a really great guy who I have never heard use “intentionally” offensive language. I have read all his books, had breakfast w/ him, been on a weekend retreat w/ him, heard him speak in a conference, etc. Plus, his background is as an English professor!
And now for my favorite “cussing” story from Tony Campolo who used to do this from time to time to make the point of our rather stupid “issues.” He would start a speech like this [obviously not exactly like this but you’ll get it]…
“In the past 24 hours approximately 20,000 kids have died from hunger and other preventable diseases and most of you don’t give a shit. And what’s even worse is that many of you are more upset that I just used the word shit, than you are that 20,000 kids died last night!”
There are so many offensive things that break God’s heart and I don’t really think our use [and abuse] of words is too high up the list. What is our heart saying seems to be Jesus’ concern.

left by TLC on 02.14.2007 at 5:04 pm

TLC, thank you so much for your comment. That is exactly what I’ve been struggling to express.

left by adam on 02.14.2007 at 6:15 pm

To TLC:

You’re absolutely right on two things:
1. I did misspell McLaren.

And 2. I was confusing him with a different emerging church leader - Mark Driscoll. My sincere apologies for the confusion.

left by jebbarr on 02.16.2007 at 4:10 pm

join the conversation...