Archive for the 'Ethics' Category

01
Mar
10

Why Do We Need a LGBT Health Month?

Because LGBT individuals historically have been labeled deviant or pathological by many in the medical and psychiatric community, they have been marginalized by some segments of the health professions. As a result, many gays and lesbians do not disclose their sexual orientation to their health care providers (Cochran & Mays, 1988). Consequently, many LGBT individuals, particularly transgender individuals, are reluctant to use mainstream health care services and are medically underserved.

However, LGBT health advocates and professionals have lobbied for changes in mainstream professional organizations. This has resulted in policy statements addressing the needs of LGBT clients and the formation of official LGBT affiliates, such as the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on the Status of Lesbian and Gay Psychologists and the American Psychiatric Association’s Committee on Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Issues. Although these changes have been important steps in establishing ethical guidelines for appropriate care, many health and mental health treatment providers remain uncomfortable with sexual diversity and continue to discriminate against LGBT clients. Continue reading ‘Why Do We Need a LGBT Health Month?’

03
Oct
09

Buffet or Banquet – Acts 11:1-18

In order to be faithful to the gospel of Christ, we must have boundaries, right? There are things that are normal and proper – limits to what we do and believe. And yet to be faithful to the gospel, there is this nudging, this incessant prodding, as the Holy Spirit pushes us out beyond our limits. There is this nagging voice always whispering in our ear, “Are these limits God’s – or are they ours?”

Peter believed in limits. We learn that in the reading. We could easily think that Peter’s limits are simply the dietary laws of Leviticus. But, there is a much larger issue going on here.

Peter believed in the validity of all the Levitical laws. Those laws not only said what you could eat, but what you could wear, which nation you should belong to, how you should worship and who you should love. You see, for Peter and some other church leaders, you had to be a Jew in good standing to be considered a follower of Christ. To be in good standing you had to be “pure” and live up to all the laws – end of discussion.

Well, actually not the end of discussion. To be a Jew in good standing, you had to live up to those Levitical laws that the hierarchy decided were still binding. Just as in current times, some were and some weren’t. The Levitical laws have been used selectively ever since they were formalized. It just depended on who was calling the shots at the time. Continue reading ‘Buffet or Banquet – Acts 11:1-18′

29
Sep
09

It Isn’t Easy to Love – a reflection on Matt 22:34-46

Readings: 1 Thess 2 & Matt 22:34-46.

In the first century Roman world, status was critical. By someone’s place in the social order, he or she would be allocated value or worth. The emperor stood at the top of Roman culture. Everyone else like politicians, soldiers, business people, general citizens and slaves had their places in relation to those above and below them.

Like Rome, every outlying city had its own social stratification. People attempted to maintain or raise their position in many ways. Making major gifts to the city was a way of gaining public honor. Funding a building, education or some other public facility like a bath or gymnasium, which were very important in Roman culture, were all ways to gain status. So was supporting an artist or artisan, guiding a young person or helping people find work.

These were all very good things, but the reasons for doing them were self-serving. It was called patronage and it was essential to the social system. Beneficiaries gave respect and status to their patron – flattery that had currency because it elevated the patron’s power, prestige and position.

In return, the beneficiaries expected more favors, assistance and general support. Conferring honor to those higher up in the social order was an economic transaction that had material benefit for those lower on the scale. It was a system designed to keep people in place in the social order by making each dependent on the patronage of those above them. Continue reading ‘It Isn’t Easy to Love – a reflection on Matt 22:34-46′

27
Sep
09

Generosity in the Belly of the Whale – Jonah 3:10-4:11

Jonah 3:10 – 4:11  &  Matthew 20:1-16

We hear two parables in today’s readings. The last one is the Parable of laborers in the Vineyard from the Gospel of Matthew. The first was the Parable of the Jealous Prophet.

Now, there are a range of thoughts about the original intent of Book of Jonah. Some understand it to be a narrative of both historic and natural fact. Others laugh and say that it is purely fantasy. There have been arguments about the Book of Jonah for millennia – from the time of the first Rabbinic interpretations all the way through to the present.

Arguments still go on about whether it was a marine dinosaur, a whale or a big fish that swallowed Jonah – that, of course depends on what you believe about creation and evolution. And arguments about whether it would be possible for a human to be swallowed whole by any of them and survive – which, of course, depends on whether you believe miracles happen. And then there are arguments about … Well, never mind. You get the idea.

Suffice to say that, as with so many things, the Book of Jonah presents yet one more reason for people of faith to fight with each other. And what is at stake in these arguments? Why the right to claim to be right, of course. It seems like, if any party can convince enough people that it’s right, their truth will somehow become God’s truth – that somehow God will be and act the way they think God should based on a majority vote.

And into this fight I am going to step and say, “I don’t care.” Continue reading ‘Generosity in the Belly of the Whale – Jonah 3:10-4:11′

18
Sep
09

Reflection on the Fig Tree – Luke 13:1-9

Reading: Luke 13:1-9.

“If the fig tree bears fruit next year, well and good; but if not, you can cut it down.” Well, that could generate a little stress for the fig tree, couldn’t it? It really does sound kind of harsh.

Since it is a continuation, to grasp the meaning we need to briefly revisit chapter 12. Luke 12, leading up to this reading, can be a little disconcerting. Jesus made a comment of the sort we don’t usually associate with him; Jesus said he had come to bring to the earth not peace, but division. Family member will be set against family member. This challenges our image of Jesus as the “prince of Peace”, doesn’t it?

Still, as God’s own Messenger in the midst of this world, there is no avoiding a certain degree of conflict. Jesus’ insertion into this world as a truly holy person was like putting a white hot piece of iron into a bucket of cold water—a boiling reaction was inevitable. Continue reading ‘Reflection on the Fig Tree – Luke 13:1-9′

17
Sep
09

What Does Dominion over Creation Mean?

Whether you believe in Creation as a 6-day or an evolving process, we generally seem to have no doubt we, as humans, were the ultimate goal in God’s Creation. In either case we have assumed dominion over the earth, ruling over all its inhabitants and resources. Is this really what God had in mind? We obviously have no way of knowing absolutely, but we certainly can gain clues from Scripture. The point of this message is not to determine the answer to those questions, but simply to offer other, possibly more controversial, views of God’s position. Continue reading ‘What Does Dominion over Creation Mean?’

25
Aug
09

A Cynics View of the History of Disciple-making

The adherents of Christian religions include upwards of 2 billion people – almost one-third of the world’s population, according to David Barrett, an Evangelical Christian who is the compiler of religious statistics for the Encyclopedia Britannica.[1] While Christianity began in the Middle East, it is generally considered a European/ American religion. Those areas, however, do not encompass the majority of adherents. More Christians, in fact, are found in the “third world” – those areas that were formerly colonized by various European powers.  The story of the spread of the world’s most prolific religion during the second millennia of Christianity is at least interesting, if not informative of the current political and military efforts of the West, most notably the U.S., seemingly aimed at making converts of another sort – disciples of Western democracy and capitalism. Continue reading ‘A Cynics View of the History of Disciple-making’

19
Aug
09

What Kind of Peace? – Matthew 10:24-39

In this chapter of the Gospel of Matthew I hear Jesus saying to the disciples, “So, you want to be a follower of Christ?”

The chapter begins with Jesus giving the disciples’ ministry and mission, “proclaim the good news, ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’ Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. You received without payment; give without payment.” Then, Jesus tells them what might happen to them on the way, culminating in the instructions to flee to another town when they are persecuted. Jesus tells the disciples that because the culture opposes Jesus, it will also oppose them – they are not above the same treatment that their teacher encounters.

But, Jesus says, do not be afraid – bring what you have seen and learned in secret into the light and proclaim it from the rooftops. And God will know and value you for doing so. Not only that, but knowing what they are doing as followers of Christ, Jesus promises to testify on their behalf before God.

And, lastly, Jesus tells the disciples what they will witness in families and communities as they deliver the good news. The reaction to the good news of the gospel may not be good news. Continue reading ‘What Kind of Peace? – Matthew 10:24-39′

18
Aug
09

The Power and the Glory – Matthew 4:1-11

Read the passage here.

Being a numbers geek, I am always tempted to craft an artful sermon about the significance of forty – you know, going over the theological, cultural and political significance of forty as it appears so many times in scripture. I am tempted, but I know that I would probably be the only one who got anything out of it – and, as I so often need to be reminded, it’s not about me.

I am still tempted, though. If I did it well, it would be a sign that I was pretty gifted when it comes to theological study – it could make me look good. But, then again, looking good – making a big impression – is that what ministry is really about?

Then again, if I did it REALLY well and used a lot of theological language that was tough to understand – and I made sure that the right people got a copy of it – I could get some real mileage out of it in the presbytery. I could gain some power and prestige out of that, couldn’t I?

Okay – probably not. Continue reading ‘The Power and the Glory – Matthew 4:1-11′

13
Aug
09

A home run for willis

I have known conservatives and liberals both who wore their theology as a cloak of colors – a piece of finery aimed at showing just how special they are. Each have doctrines that are honorable in many respects, edified by scripture and suitably pious. In the end, however – that end where who and what we are is best recognized by how we act – there is something lacking. Humility is manytimes absent in such folk, or at least overshadowed by stubborn certainty.

I would like to tell myself that this is true mostly for people towards the conservative end of the imaginary line on which we keep God, but I know just as many on the left. Being a centrist who waddles to one side or the other as the issues change, I am thrown into the category sometimes of being wishy-washy theologically. I would beg to differ, but these folks aren’t going to believe someone who doesn’t sit at their table.

Then you have true believers – I am not referring just to faith, but to theology. I find that people who truly believe what they stand for are really quite humble. They recognize that the theological sun does not set on them, but that they need to cleave to their set of beliefs that their integrity requires. Conservative or liberal – or somewhere in between – I have all the time in the world for these people. Such a person is Willis at Willohroots - certainly more conservative than I, but equally grounded in scripture. Would we agree in a theological debate about minutae – I doubt it. But we agree on the far more important stuff.  I could be very happy attending his church. Read what he had to say – it’s brilliant in its truth. Continue reading ‘A home run for willis’

10
Aug
09

Walter Wink co-sponsored by Church Within a Church

CWAC logo 1

“A progressive Methodist movement dedicated to BEing the fully inclusive church.”

 


 

Walter Wink

 

 

Grand Taylor Chapel of Chicago Theological Seminary,

5757 S. University Ave, Chicago, Ill 

Thursday, September 24, 2009, 7pm—9pm

  Continue reading ‘Walter Wink co-sponsored by Church Within a Church’

10
Aug
09

Devouring Creation – greed and God

It is, at least to me, moot whether the Scripture’s description of Creation is literal, or a metaphorical story to illustrate the process undertaken by God to form our universe and all in it. The argument of Creation vs. evolution has equally debatable value. The only more miraculous notion than God creating every thing that exists is the idea that God created every living thing with the built-in ability to adapt to its environment.

Science calls the universe random, but that requires the presence of no laws, parameters or order whatsoever. Random, which means unsystematic or haphazard, cannot exist in the presence of order or laws. Once it is determined that even one law or parameter is present, and science has declared a multitude, or one prediction can be made, the quality of ‘random’ cannot be applied.

The opposite, then, must be true. The universe is systematic, and therefore the product of design. Science simply tends, as it always has, to discount that which cannot be quantified or qualified, in this case the hand of God.

Whether you believe in Creation as a 6-day or an evolving process, we generally seem to have no doubt we, as humans, were the ultimate goal in God’s Creation. In either case we have assumed dominion over the earth, ruling over all its inhabitants and resources. Is this really what God had in mind? We obviously have no way of knowing absolutely, but we certainly can gain clues from Scripture. The point of this essay is not to determine the answer to those questions, but simply to offer other, possibly more controversial, views of God’s position. Continue reading ‘Devouring Creation – greed and God’

09
Aug
09

The Ten Commandments – Exodus 20:1-20

One of my former ministers once told me that if I ever get a chance to preach on the Ten Commandments – don’t. He told me that whenever he had preached about them in the past, someone got very upset. Some people, he said, think they are the cornerstone of righteousness – the sign of a faithful nation that should be displayed prominently on every government building. And some, he said, think they are pie-in-the sky ideals that are impossible to live up to, and have no place in public discourse.

So I well imagine Thom shaking his finger at me right now and saying, “I warned you.”

The Ten Commandments or Decalogue – literally “Ten Words” – are foundational in both Judaism and Christianity, and for good reason. Scripture tells us they were given to Moses directly from God. The scripture that tells us this is our reading that follows, but also Exodus 34 and Deuteronomy 5.

The Ten Commandments are clear, concise, memorable and unambiguous, and form the basis for ethical behavior of two of the world’s prominent religions. That, at least, is what we learn in Sunday School or catechism. Reality, as usual, says something different. Continue reading ‘The Ten Commandments – Exodus 20:1-20′

07
Aug
09

Times that try our souls – Micah 3:5-12

The first part of the Micah reading is the alternate lectionary OT reading for the Sunday after All Saints Day. The second part from Micah I included to remind us of the prophets consistent theme. Rarely are the prophets the primary reading, except for some parts of Isaiah and Ezekiel, because they can sound harsh to our ears.

The function of the Biblical prophets was to call the Israelite leadership back into right relations with God, and they did this by speaking to those in power using very clear and stark words. They preached at times of chaos and social unrest – when there was dis-ease and oppression of the many by the dominant few.

Contrary to the way we tend to understand prophecy in our times, the Biblical prophets weren’t fortune-tellers predicting a future event. Their purpose – their call – was to describe to the Jewish leadership the current state of affairs – the way in which God saw current situations and events – and to communicate the consequences of continuing to ignore God’s law and staying this same course. Continue reading ‘Times that try our souls – Micah 3:5-12′

31
Jul
09

Comparative exegesis – Romans 1:14 – 2:3

When doing exegesis, I do not rely on one translation exclusively, because each have taken certain liberties in syntax or word choice, and even added the occasional word where it did not exist in the original language. Experience has taught me that no version can made a claim to be “the right” translation or interpretation of the scriptures, and to rely solely on one version is to elevate or even idolize a work of human endeavor. Translating and interpreting are human exercises to bring ancient texts to more modern readers who speak different languages, after all. The question, then, is not one of inerrancy of the texts in the original languages, but the inaccuracies of translated and interpreted versions.

I will also be making an argument that, to separate that chapter 1 of this epistle from the beginning of chapter 2, abuses the scripture and robs Paul’s argument of its greatest import. It must be remembered that chapter and verse were added well after the fact.

While the scriptures were divided into paragraphs by time of the Council of Nicea (325 AD), these are not the same as those in our modern translations. The New Testament was divided into chapters by Archbishop Steven Langdon around 1230 AD, and verses were introduced in 1551 by Robert Estienne. The first English Bible to make use of both chapter and verse was the translation of the Geneva Bible in 1560.

The decision to separate 1:14 through 2:16 remains a quandary but has substantially altered what may be one of Paul’s most remarkable arguments.
Continue reading ‘Comparative exegesis – Romans 1:14 – 2:3′




... or, preaching from both ends

WELL, HELLO! YOU’RE HERE.

That's too bad - I'm so sorry. Oh, well, just try to make the best of it. What you'll find here is a variety of essays and ramblings to do with things theological, social, whimsical and, sometimes, all three. I don't write to get famous - trust me, I've been told how futile that would be - but to express myself. I love to communicate and browbeat - ummm, I mean dialogue - about the things I find intriguing. Since you're here, and the door's locked, why don't you stay a while. There's a page bar under the header with links to information about us - I mean me. Don't forget to tell me what you think - in a nice way, I mean.

Readers since Jan 2009

  • 21,805 posts read

Archives