Open Path

History of the Christian Church Q and A

Question:

Hello.  I have been very excited about the progressive Christian movement and have been doing a lot of reading on it...Shelby Spong, etc......I have been a conservative Christian most of my life, but have felt cheated because I know that most churches do not teach the real facts about church history.  I am looking for a referral to a good book on Church history from the death of Jesus to current.  Like how did we get to where we are today.  More specifically, I am looking for things like Aneselems substitional atonement, information on other church Father's (the main ones at least).  I just learned through my own research that substitionary atonement came from Anselem around 1000 AD and that his father was very harsh (abusive?) - no wonder Anselem viewed God as harsh and needing to kill someone!  These are the things the church refuses to teach, but I want to learn.  Please help me.  Thanks! And Blessings! 

~David

Answer:

David,

Our Associate Director asked several of us to come up some suggestions for you, so I am copying them with my response to you.  Your question is asking a lot. To give you an idea, while in seminary I was required to take two courses, with four to five books each on church history alone. However there have been some more contemporary attempts at doing just what you are asking but rust me, these are not easy reading. 

The most recent and my first recommendation is a book written by Diarmaid MacColloch called The History of Christianity. (2009)You may find this daunting but it is close to 1200 pages long. I assure you that you could not cover the book thoroughly in any less. It is a New York best seller.  Although I have not personally read the book it has had excellent reviews by people I respect. (I actually ordered it recently)

A classic book, by the same title was written by Paul Johnson in 1975 would also give you a solid foundation. I did have to read this one and it was a challenge in my early seminary days. At that time it was considered cutting edge because Johnson was not afraid to point out the good, the bad and the ugly in history of the church. I remember that taking me by surprise in the early 1980s. It is also close to 1000 pages and will take you some time. I am told that MacColloch’s book is more readable and probably a better book since there has been a lot of scholarly work done in the this area in the last 40 years. 

If you would like the best book of the earliest beginnings, John Dominic Crossan The Historical Jesus. Crossan covers much of the same material without all of the scholarly demands in his next book Jesus a Revolutionary Biography and it is a much easier read.  

Two books that might help you on your historical journey are both by Robert Price. The first one Deconstructing Jesus 2000 and The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man may be more information than you want right now but these books are incredibly illuminating about the sketchy information we have about Jesus the pre-Jesus social setting, the religious, political and cultural forces the influenced the way the story of Jesus was told and early Christianity was formed.

There is about a year of  reading for you. Write me back and let me know what you learned.

Thanks for writing.

Fred

 

Why A Progressive Christian Education Program for Children?

By Rev. Madison Shockley

Many parents, who don’t find the religion they learned as children very useful in their adult lives, still find themselves coming back to church with their children, hoping to give them a sense of community, ritual, and a spiritual grounding. But the curriculum in most Sunday Schools, even within progressive churches, has been more of a barrier than an asset.  A Joyful Path is a new curriculum for children ages 6-10 from  www.progressivechristianity.org (formerly The Center for Progressive Christianity/www.tcpc.org) and it is a “breath of fresh air”. This curriculum is offered in response to an aching desire by parents with a progressive Christian faith for spiritual education that will not require them to “de-program” their children from traditional Christianity when they get older.  

Most Christian education curricula are premised on the unspoken orthodoxy of traditional Christianity. The-Big-Guy-in-the-Sky as metaphor for God, the magical Jesus who walks on water, and a “place” called heaven are the three legs of the traditional Christian stool. For progressive Christians, many would simply rather not subject their children to the idea of a judgmental God, a superhero Jesus, and a human community divided between the saved and unsaved. For them, A Joyful Path is truly an answer to prayer.

A side-by-side comparison of the various curricula on the market today shows the disparities and highlights what exactly A Joyful Path can offer.  One example of a self-avowed evangelical curriculum is called Discipleland.  Its stated purpose is to “train children in Christian Discipleship”. The downright scary part of their pedagogy is the idea that “introducing them to a Bible-times culture” will at all prepare them for serious biblical scholarship.

Seasons of the Spirit is the mainline ecumenical curriculum that serves the historic protestant churches. Seasons of the Spirit does not have the sharp elbows of Discipleland. The drawback is its feet being so firmly planted in the bible-based schedule of the lectionary, which dictates what scripture passages and themes are dealt with each week. This rigidity leads to an embarrassing situation raised in the lesson on the calling of the first disciples. The eminently bourgeois commitments of the mainline curriculum are on full display when the teacher material warns that “the passage about the disciples quitting their jobs (as fishermen) and leaving their families to follow Jesus may well stir feelings of abandonment and insecurity among the children who have had parents leave because of divorce”. In other words, Jesus is nice to talk about, but we would never do what he actually said! This is exactly the kind of watered down faith that has allowed the evangelicals and fundamentalists to raid the membership of the liberal pews and caused so many more to simply leave asking, “Why bother with religion at all?”

A Joyful Path utilizes this same story, but leads the teacher and the children to first examine how much of life is fully lived when people are open and willing to try new things! How refreshing. In contrast to the fear-based approach of both the evangelical and mainline curricula, A Joyful Path lives up to its name and nurtures the kind of carefree, faith filled attitude that we find so evident in the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.   Using a theme driven curriculum rather than a lectionary based curriculum, the designers of A Joyful Path have based their lesson plans on a set of spiritual values rather than an arbitrary list of bible stories that have no coherent message.  The central idea for each lesson is expressed as an affirmation and a verse from the Bible.  Each lesson illustrates the main learning with a story, gleaning from the Bible, biographies, legends of saints, and folktales from a variety of cultures.  The illustrations are beautiful and inclusive in their depiction of race and socio-economic differences.

A Joyful Path is little concerned with the magical, fantastic and esoteric aspects of what has been called the “Jesus of faith”.  Many of the lessons focus on ways we can emulate the same practical compassion with others as Jesus so often demonstrated.  This is the heart of the gospel for progressive Christianity, learning about what the “historical Jesus” said and did and let that shape our lives.  Another advantage of this new curriculum is that it fully recognizes that not all spiritual people will sit in a pew.  The home version of this curriculum engages the parent-teacher on their own spiritual journey as they lead their children down “A Joyful Path”.

 Evangelical Discipleland offers to build obedient children. Seasons of the Spirit offers to create informed children. But only A Joyful Path offers children the opportunity to learn the core values of following the way of Jesus as they grow into an understanding of what that means at each stage of their lives.  It is fun, interactive, hope-filled, and encourages children to see themselves as interconnected to all, preparing them for a life time of compassion and love for others. 

For more information go to www.progressivechristianity.org.

Big Tent Christianity thoughts

Fred--

I've been a quiet observer of PXnty, while also being engaged  in a cool

start-up ministry of a local, Episcopal Parish.  I first heard Brian

McClaren speak while attending an annual youth pastors conference--and sort

of witnessed the birthing of the EC.  This was 1999 in San Diego.  What

struck me then was the role liturgy and ritual were playing in this new

reformation, and the interesting awareness that these were 2nd and 3rd

generation evangelicals learning to light candles, honor silence, accept

ambiguity, while still being passionate--and expecting some kick-ass music

and big screen visuals.  Today, these folk still inspire me.  The next step

for reformation is for those of us with life-long commitments to mainline

life to let go of our traditions, our rituals, even our pensions, and

realize that every age and expression needs reform.  This is all really

hard--and amazingly interesting.  Check in with Rob Bell--and see the s***

he takes.  Look up Eugene Cho.  Unbelievable pastor--who also has founded a

global movement fighting extreme poverty. What these guys have--and what I

wish for--is the freedom that comes when you let go of trying to defend

whatever "orthodoxy" you have inherited.  That freedom is worth pursuing.  

 

Bill,

Thanks for your email last week. Because of a busy travel schedule and a huge response from our readers on the last eBulletin I have spent the last week just trying to catch up. We really hit some kind of nerve or generated some kind of excitement (depending on the reader) with this publication. Our reader response was nearly 3 times the highest we have ever received in the last five years.

Thanks for the tip on Rob Bell and Cho. I did look them up and I find it very interesting and seems to reflect one of the challenges I believe that EC movement must someday face. I noted that in Bell's website that there was no mention of substitutionary salvation or even that Jesus was God. I only read the first page of the church’s website and one of his articles, but clearly that is not the agenda for the church or for him. Cho on the other hand is still sticking with the basic story, albeit spoken with some new metaphors and illustrations. From Cho’s blog:

" God has descended. God has come to us. God, through his Son, Jesus, has moved into our neighborhood and into our hearts. Jesus who was fully God – yet chose to become fully human and in great love, chooses obedience – even unto death – so that we might be reconciled."

I think that same split may be one of the major challenges of the EC movement and it will be interesting to watch. I have been doing that more since the Phoenix event. After several conversations with some of the attendees and after following up on some of their blogs, it is not clear to me that they see themselves as part of one group. The divide seems to foster (or fester) around: 1. the belief that Jesus was God, died for our sins as part of God’s design or 2. Jesus was a prophetic teacher (with degrees of uniqueness) who was teaching us by words and example how to experience the Kingdom of God here on earth, in our lives. Or as one person put it to experience salvation (to be made whole) in the present.

It appears to me the Brian McLaren and of course Borg have moved to the second story and there were still plenty in the room (tent) who were hanging on to the first story. Can they all be part of one movement?  Can they live happily in one “tent?”  How much will these former evangelicals let go or can they agree to disagree and just live happily ever after? It appears to me to be a rebirth of the Arius/Athanasius  battle even though most of the attendees would have no idea what that means since few of them were schooled in graduate seminaries, not that this means anything.

I would like to chat with people like Rob Bell about this. I don’t want to debate or get into theological B.S. I just want to know how he looks at this or if it is important. How big is the tent and would I, for example be included.

I know you must be frustrated as are many clergy across the country tied to their denominations, their health care, pensions and church buildings. Episcopalians have a particularly difficult situations with Bishops who vary from wide open to ultra traditional. It is clear to me that the institutional/corporate model is collapsing, however. I just hope my meager UCC pension will last for a couple more decades.

Thanks for writing. I hope to hear back from you.

Warmly, Fred

Q and A on A Joyful Path Children's Curriculum

What is a Wisdom Path"? What is inter-spiritual language?" How can anyone "see God within everyone" when God is not defined? Why teach Jesus's "teachings" if there is not some connection with God? ~Marie

Marie,

Thanks for writing. You ask important questions that most people just ignore but that does not stop them from talking as if they do know. First let’s be clear that no one can define "God." God is just one of the words we humans created to try and make sense out of the great mystery of creation. We can no more define god with accuracy then a horse can define humans, or for that matter a bug can define humans. We really do not understand Black Holes and multiple universes, although scientist tell us that they exist. And scientist actually cannot fully explain gravity but we "experience it" every moment of our lives unless we happen to be an astronaut.

Wisdom teaching is intended to guide someone into an "experience" the Great Mystery we chose to call God. You will find Wisdom Teaching in all of the ancient religious traditions which should be no surprise since they all started with a life transforming experience by their respective founder. Wisdom is sometimes known as Sophia perennis, it is concerned with the transformation of the whole human being. Not everyone wants transformation but most humans at some point in their lives, start wondering if this is all there is, start feeling like they are missing something. How do I live my life so that I see and hear and feel all that there is? For the Christian contemplatives, transformation is about moving past our egocentric, fearful, judging ways. It is about learning to live more compassionate, more loving lives. It is about going from a dualistic world view to a non-dualistic perspective; it is ultimately about having an experience of complete unity and oneness with all creation. I might suggest that this is an experience of that mystery we call “God.” This was the primary objective of Jesus teaching before his teachings were turned into religious debates. When we talk about a non-dualistic perspective, we are referring to the concept that we are all one creation and there is no separation between all living things, including the Creative One, except those our ego has created. We may not be able to define it but for those who have had such an experience of Unity or Sacred Unity as the early Christians may have defined it, there are no boundaries, no boarders, there are no separations, just oneness as part of that Great Mystery you might choose to call God.

Inter-spiritual language is when we look at the wisdom teachings of other traditions in order to garner a better understanding of our own traditions. We believe that in so doing, we come to realize that most of these ancient traditions have much in common in their original  teachings. For us that means that we must be on the right track. For many the wisdom path had led to an experience of the Holy Unity but for them it does not end in a definition, but rather it leads to Wonder and Awe. May it be for you.

I hope this is helpful.

 

Thanks for writing,

Fred

 

Q and A with President Fred: Theological Questions

Dear Sir, I was surfing the web when I came upon your site and was curious about your position on a few theological issues. If you have time I would appreciate a response.

On your Home page it says that you respect other religious traditions and are opposed to any exclusive dogma. To help me understand this better I have two questions.

 

1. How do you interpret John 14:6, where Jesus makes the exclusive claim "I am the way, the truth and the light. No man comes to the Father except through me."?

2. When you use the word "respect" other religious traditions are you embracing Universalism?

 

I'm not trying to be mean spirited but am truly curious as to your position.

Thank you, Rev. Scott

 

Dear Rev.,

It is difficult to answer your question fully without a lengthy dissertation about the different ways in which we approach the Bible. Unfortunately, I cannot do justice to that subject in an email but let me try to respond to your questions recognizing that my response might create more questions that it provides answers.  

Most of us in the progressive movement have been trained in seminaries that required us to do scholarly work in what was called Biblical Criticism. For example we would agree with scholars who concluded that the Book of John was written by someone who lived and wrote in the last decade of the first century, maybe 70 years after Jesus’ death. Much had changed in the budding Christian movement and the Roman Empire by that time. The followers of Jesus had been pushed out of the destroyed Jerusalem and were struggling for an identity. The Jewish leadership no longer considered the Jesus movement part of the Judaism and there was a great deal of tension between the Jesus followers (early Christians) and the Jewish leadership. Jewish families were divided not only from each other but within the families and early followers were discouraged because the promised Messiah had not returned as expected.  Much of what you read in John was a attempt to respond to these challenging and often painful issues. The passage that you have cited is just one of many examples of this tension and the “church” leadership’s response. It was conditioned by the situation and the beliefs of the leadership of that sect of Christianity at that time. There is no such declaration in the book of Thomas, Mark or even Matthew written several decades before when the movement was still considered a Jewish sect.

If you have not done so you might get a better idea of this way of approaching the bible by reading Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism by John Shelby Spong. It is still one of the most concise books on a scholarly way to approach the Bible and often opens people’s eyes to a more informed way of reading the text.  

I am not certain what you mean by “universalism” in your second question and not all progressive Christians would have the same perspective on that question. However most of us here at ProgressivieChristianity.org start with the assumption that all religions at one time started with some special person having a fundamental life changing spiritual experience of the Sacred, the Holy, The Great Mystery we choose to call God. Most of these unique people try and find words, metaphors and examples out of their social setting, culture and their time to and explain to their listeners what they experienced in this profound mystery.  Over the centuries these metaphors, the language of the times is turned into religious doctrine, and dogma by the much later followers who want to organize and control. However the experience that these unusual people had, when we cut through the crusty layers of dogma and doctrines, are often very similar, unique only in their moment in history and cultural of the time. Christianity is no different.

Here at PC.org we focus on the teachings of Jesus, not the doctrines that were literally created in the fourth century by some very powerful bishops who were more interested in politics than they were in spiritual experiences of the Sacred. We do not care what path one uses to try and experience the truly Sacred or that “Realm of God” that Jesus spoke of. What we care about is helping people find a path that works for them. I have spent that last forty years teaching the path of Jesus and it works for me and many others. If another path works for someone else I celebrate that, particularly if it helps them become a more loving, compassionate person…and if it changes their life and allows them the opportunity to live fully, fearlessly without boundaries or divisions with all creation.  If that is universalism than I guess we embrace that.

I hope this is helpful and thank you for writing.

With Warm Regards,

Fred

Fred C. Plumer

President

ProgressiveChristianity.org

www.ProgressiveChristianity.org

A Painful Experience

By: Fred Plumer

I have shared most of this information for several years now in workshops and lectures all over the country. The state of the mainline (Old-line) churches is not good. I frequently share the disheartening statistics on the dwindling church memberships and data on the number of churches that are closing in hopes that people realize that we have to do something different in our faith communities if the church as we know it is going to survive. And let me be clear. When I say “as we know it” I mean as something different than the ultra-conservative, fundamentalist, cultic churches, fear based or abundance promises that appear to be surviving if not thriving in our country.

Most of the time, I think people do not believe me. I am frequently asked the source of my information and other times someone my just outright challenges my numbers based on their own experience in their respective church.  For the record, most of data that I use comes from an annual publication that is produced by the National Council of Churches. The NCC is dependent on numbers for the respective denominations and frankly they are probably softened. I have had several conversations with denominational executives that admit, off the record, that the numbers that they give to NCC are optimistic.

When I present these statistics to folks who have gathered to have a conversation about the benefits of moving in a more progressive direction in our churches, I must admit, I have become a bit desensitized to them.  They are just numbers, after all, and frankly they help me make a case for change.

But I recently did a workshop that was different. It was painful, very painful, actually. It was a relatively small turnout, maybe a little less than fifty people both days.  Turned out there were people from about ten churches represented over the day. The average age of those in attendance was probably something over 70 years. The first presentation was about the state of the church, when I take a close look at the status of our beloved denominational churches. No one challenged my numbers or even seemed surprised.  They were clearly more interested in solutions, solutions that were probably too little too late for most of them.

During the break for lunch I had planned to take a quiet walk to get centered and maybe a little refreshed. One gentleman asked if he could talk to me for just a minute.  Turns out he was really distraught. Did I have any idea, he wanted to know, what his dying church could do?  He told me that he had been part of his church for over 50 years. Apparently they were going to have to close their doors after the first of the year. What do we do, he asked again?

I encouraged him to find another church or start a house church with the ten or twelve people who were still there. He nodded his head like he agreed but his obvious pain hit me.  We chatted for another minute or two but I felt helpless. 

As I headed off on my planned walk, a woman who had been standing a few feet away came up to me before I could take three steps and asked if she could speak to me just for a minute. She explained that she also was from another church that was closing. She apparently had overheard the conversation I had just had.  The circumstances were a little different. They had a building to sell and hoped to start a faith community in a storefront. She wanted to know if I thought it would work.  I asked what her little group planned to do that was different from what they had been doing when they had their own building. She looked at me for a long time and then with tears in our eyes she said she didn’t know. “We are all pretty old you know,” she said wearily. I was at a total loss for words. Without thinking I put my arms around this loyal, dedicated, faithful old woman and just hugged her. It 
did not seem right. Here was this woman who had served her church for most of her eight decades.  And now, in the years when the church should have been serving her, her beloved church was dissolving before her eyes. 

That is when it hit me. My statistics were no longer just numbers.  They were real hurting people who have lost their beloved churches, during a time in their respective lives when they most needed them.  It turns out that there was one other church that was represented at this weekend event that will be closing soon as well. The story the folks people shared from that church was a little different. But their pain was the same. I was not certain if all of these folks were there in hopes of finding some miraculous idea that might save their respective churches or if they were there to simply share their stories.  Either way I have been able to get them out of my mind and my heart.

I hope someone got something out of our time together. I know I did, but it was a painful learning experience.

Love and Fear

I know it is not accurate or maybe even helpful to create simple dichotomies but as I look back over my life and think of all the wonderful people I have come to know, I am beginning to wonder if people either live their lives primarily motivated by love or by fear. This statement of course requires some qualifiers.  When I refer to love, I am not thinking of romantic or addictive love here, but rather a love for life which probably includes a love for self as well as for others. Likewise when I refer to someone primarily motivated by fear, I am not referring to someone who is necessarily paralyzed by fear but rather someone who gravitates toward all of the things that could go wrong before taking an action, if indeed they take action.

 I also do not mean to suggest that people who are primarily motivated fear do not experience love or people primarily motivated by love do not experience fear.   I have come to wonder if these are just two different perspectives or lenses through which we humans view our reality-either something very scary or something very interesting, exciting or even wonderful.

I was guest lecturer one time in a college class on religion. I asked the students, ages 18-55, if they either saw themselves in a world that was full of dark forces and obstacles over which they had no power.  Therefore a big part of their life would be devoted to avoiding these forces and obstacles. Or did they see their life as one exciting journey full of opportunities and whatever obstacles they encountered they saw them as an opportunity to learn. 

I tried very hard to disguise my own bias, but was surprised to learn that the class was actually split approximately in half. Age seemed to have very little to do with their relative perspective. I wondered what kind of religious perspective someone would have who saw the world full of dark forces would have and what kind of spiritual or religious expression someone who saw life as a journey full of opportunities would be attracted to. I have my own suspicions but no scientific evidence to support them.

What I do know is that fear is a powerful energy. It creates isolation, separation, anger, judgment, and disease.  And it is the one thing that most consistently stops us from en-joying life. Fear gives you something to be against. Fear gives one an identity. It is always easier to be against something than it is to be open to the unknown and yet no matter how careful, how secluded, or religious we become, life is full of unknowns including our own death.

So what is our greatest fear? I believe it is discovering who we really are, at the deepest level. Maybe it means slowly taking off all of the different masks we have created for ourselves and looking in the divine mirror that honestly tells us that we are precious, beautiful and perfect just the way we are…without the mask, without the makeup, without the costumes.

Marriane Williamson once wrote: “Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, and fabulous? Actually who are you not to be? You are a child of God.”

Why not let your light shine brightly and fearlessly during this season of darkness?

How do churches remain modern, "hip," and relevant for the younger generation?

To Whom it May Concern:

I am completing my PhD at Michigan State University.  I am an ex-evangelical, now progressive (Christian agnostic) with a question.

Your last email was on the topic "The Need for New Language within Progressive Christian Faith Communities."  As a former worship leader (who used contemporary music) I have wondered (as has my wife) if there are any progressive congregations that offer modern music.  Most mainline liberal or progressive churches remain culturally irrelevant.

I know why.  Historically, the use of the cultural vernacular has been used to convert.  Non-conversionist groups have little need to remain engaged.  Or do they?

I wonder if your center might consider looking into a real need.

Historian Donald Miller (in Reinventing Protestantism) has noted this quite well.  As a progressive, Miller somewhat laments that fact that mainline/progressive churches have lost ground to conservative evangelical churches that remain (ironically) modern, "hip," and relevant.

Any ideas?

Sincerely,

Shawn

 

Hi Shawn,

Thank you for your thoughtful question. Unfortunately I don't think it has a simple response. I agree that the mainline liberal churches have not remained culturally relevant. We know from data that we have collected for over the last 15 years that the single biggest reason people gave and still give for no longer attending church is that it is "no longer relevant to my life." And I do agree that the "new" churches like the ones that were the subject of Miller's book have made their worship services, their buildings and architecture and even their polity( no denominations) more modern and hip. We could all learn something from them and a few mainline churches have done that.

I disagree with Miller's thesis that the growth in these churches came from people leaving liberal mainline churches. In fact all of the church organizations that are referred to in Miller's book prided themselves for attracting the young, the unchurched and in large part single young adults.

Many of them were products of the 60's era when young married adults dropped out of the church scene as part of the anti-establishment movement. Their children were never part of a church to a great degree and were totally ignorant. Those are the young people, in large part,  that these happening, evangelical churches attracted.

Also the churches, that Miller studied, did not have to fight over which hymnal to use, whether to keep the organ or play drums. They did not have to have fights about selling the old building with the giant steeple or whether the minister should wear a robe or socks for that matter. They did not have fights about whether they needed to recite the Lord's Prayer or follow the lectionary. Woefully those fights are still going on in mainline churches and have killed more than one church along the way.

However, the real problem for mainline churches, I believe, is that we do not know why we are in business. We don't know what our product is. For over forty years most mainline seminaries have taught their students preparing for the ministry that a good part of the Jesus story is myth, developed long after his death. We were taught how to do critical analysis of the biblical text, how to date scripture, how to discover redaction and doubt veracity.

We studied Paul Tillich and listened to brilliant  professors Burton Mack (The Christian Myth).  In 1983 I  took a class called the Myth in the Bible.

We studied books by Alvin Boyd Kuhn and Gerald Massey who were experts on mythology, particularly Egyptian. They argue that there probably was no Jesus but the rather the story was a common one in Egyptian mythology and was added to the story of a very human being. Few future ministers left those classes in those years thinking the real Jesus, if there was one,  was a sacrifice for the sins of humanity. And even fewer thought that we were saved from eternal hell by our beliefs in Jesus as our personal savior.

Holy cow...we no longer sell the keys to the kingdom (heaven after we die).

Now what?

So what have most of our mainline clergy done with all of the new information? Primarily two things. One we talked about social justice. We made Jesus into Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr before they were even famous. We became liberal fundamentalist. We put on our robes and told the congregation that God wanted us to be like Jesus. We told folks if they were good Christians, they would feed the hungry and helped lift up the poor because that is what the "Bible" tells us to do and that is what Jesus would have done. We got excited about liberation theology. We became social advocates and we were proud of our accomplishments because that is what "God wanted" because it was in the holy scriptures,  and it gave us something to talk about. It made some people feel good about their church. Look what we are doing!!! Way too many of those clergy had the courage to teach and even preach what they had learned in graduate seminary.

In the meantime those people who were hurting, searching, lost and wanting, they came and went. And over the years they came a lot less because when you are in need, trying to solve the hunger situation is just a diversion at best. All of this before the organ, the hip music and the gymnasium-like worship centers.  Those that needed help moved toward the eastern religions and those who wanted to help went to Save the Whales.

The tragedy in all of this, is not that mainline churches are closing every week across the country.  The tragedy is that when you scrape through the layers of creedal muck,  the egos and fiefdoms of old Christianity, there really is a powerful message in the Jesus story. There really is a path that can lead to a more fulfilling and exciting life. There really is marked way that can lead to an experience of the Realm. There is something to the story that can bring sight to the blind and ears to hear. In other words, to be AWAKE to the reality around us.

There is hope. There are a few people who get that and are sharing it through books and lectures. People like Cynthia Bourgeault (Wisdom Jesus), Robin Myers (Saving Jesus from the Church), Greta Vosper( With or Without God), Bruce Sanguin(Darwin, Divinity and the Dance of the Cosmos), John Shelby Spong and others including myself are writing about this way of approaching our faith. We are attempting to be and teach Christianity as a way of living and experiencing life. Churches that are authentically doing this are thriving-not necessarily in the numbers of the mega churches in Orange County, CA are but thriving in the way that they are impacting lives.

Will we be able to save the church. Probably not in the form that it is in, but I believe this strand of Christianity will grow and be around for a long time. It will continue to change lives and with a little luck change the way people see the world. 

Thanks for your interesting question. I hope this has been helpful.

Warmly, Fred

A Few Thousand Years Ago

By: Fred

Now I want to take you back a few thousand years. Maybe twelve to fifteen thousand years. The humans in the Mesopotamia Valley are starting to get organized. They are building communities, rather sparse communities but communities no the less. Instead of traveling from place to place, surviving by hunting and gathering, they begin to settle in one place and begin to grow their own food. They have leaders and followers. They begin to ask questions that humans have always asked and they begin to develop rudimentary cultures. And they did what every culture does. They began to tell stories and the stories began to develop into myths.

Myths are imaginative traditions about nature, history, destiny, gods and man. They often provide explanations for things that otherwise would not have an explanation or would otherwise not make sense.

And so here we are on the plains of the valley, twelve thousand years ago, sitting around the fire that keeps them warm and keeps the scary animals away. Several families have shared a communal meal from the same fire. During a pause one little boy asks his wise father; “Daddy, why do we have to die?” The dad takes a long drag on his pipe while he thinks. He wishes he could do what daddies do in the future and say, “Son, tomorrow we will make an appointment with Pastor.

But alas there was no pastor or priest so he took a second long drag trying to think of an acceptable answer. And finally he did what people without television did in those ancient times. He told a story about how humans defied God by eating from a tree that they were not supposed to eat from. Part of being human is asking ultimate questions. Why are we here? What is the purpose of life? Why do we suffer? Why do we have to die? Who and what is God?

And so the stories were told and retold and told again often taking on components of other stories and mythological symbols of other traditions. For example, the serpent or snake was a symbol of eternal life. As ancient people watched a snake lose its outer skin, they believed that the snake had been reborn. They must have wondered; “Why God would make such a special creature crawl on the ground?” Something must have happened. There is a story in there somewhere.

You might find it interesting to know that the East was always considered a symbol of rebirth. Why? Because the sun that died in the west was reborn over and over in the east. There must be something special that happens on that side of the world. Were Adam and Eve punished when they were “banished to the East” or were they given another chance?

These stories will mean nothing unless you try and get into the world of the storyteller. Remember, these are the same people who thought the earth was flat, that there was a dome that covered the earth, that there were holes in the dome to let the rain through and that the stars were actually the light from a god’s eyes that shone through the rain holes.

Myth was and still is common in every culture. Many of the mythological stories of the ancients were very similar in different parts of the world because they were dealing with many of the same unknowns. The responses are both reflection of their ignorance and their wisdom of the day. They help us learn about the ways of a people and their important concerns. They help us understand how a culture can evolve and change as time goes by and more information is available to them. The Bible offers some of that information that is especially helpful because this was a people and a culture that was intentional about having an intentional relationship with that power, that energy, we call God, though they have very different names for that. 

But we need to be careful when we try and find answers and divine direction from these stories. They are stories, after all, from people who thought the earth was flat, the snake lived forever, and if you ate the forbidden fruit you might have to live on the East Coast where the sun is born again.  

We Need New Language for our Faith Communities!

By: Deshna Ubeda

Your faith evolves, your beliefs evolve.  You look at all text in a critical way, testing it for resonance.  Yet, when you walk into your church, does the choir sing about Christ your Savior? Does your pastor talk about bible verses in such a way that is no longer relevant?  In your faith communities do you lack the words you need to describe your beliefs?  Does the word Christianity occasionally make you cringe?  Does the sound of the church organ bring you back to days when a man in robes yelled hell's fury from a pulpit?  Do you kindly ignore the blatant hypocrisy when scripture is read? Do you find that you love the sound of the choir, the feeling of holding hands and humming a tune, but have to roll your eyes at some of the lyrics?  You gather with friends, with family to create a community of sacredspirituality, to share a common path- but do you have the words and liturgy to support it or are you using words from an outdated source, from a mistranslated text, from a time that is so far from our experience that it hardly relevant anymore?  We have all been there at one point. Maybe you, lucky you, have found a faith community where the language is consistent with the commonly held beliefs- but you may not know how hard your pastor and music director struggle each week to make this possible.   We want to help!  We vow to continue to create, discover, and make available liturgy, music, and other resources that will provide your faith community- or just you yourself- with a language that is relevant and inspiring.  We are excited to offer the following new resources: Holy Breath, Prayers for Worship and Reflection, by Gretta Vosper Another Breath, Prayers for Celebration and Reflection, by Gretta Vosper; and The Wonder of Life, Songs for the Spirit, by Scott Kearns. Gretta and Scott wowed us at the Common Dreams Conference in Melbourne, Australia with their amazing ability to use new and relevant language to describe the path of a progressive Christian spirituality.  We are thrilled to be able to share these resources with you. We are also working hard on our Liturgy project- bringing together Liturgy from our contacts all over the world.  Share yours today!  We will soon make our first edition available to download.  And coming up soon in our store: If Darwin Prayed, by Bruce Sanguin... "Overshadow our low estimation of our selves, with Spirit's esteeming presence.  Overshadow our fear that you are calling us with Spirit's empowering grace." Check back in our store and in our library for these and other resources for your faith community.

Check out our recent articles on all this topic!!

Freedom Expanding Resources?

Excerpt from a recent email:

"Dear Fred,

I am thinking of letting my affiliation lapse. I'm glad you guys are around. I'm also looking for spiritual help with encouraging progressive Christian values in grassroots democracy.

For example, empathy is the soul of democracy, caring for fellow citizens, leading to principles of freedom and fairness for all. Since there are no resources at progressive Christianity and I'm really focused there, I am strongly considering letting my affiliation lapse.

Please contact me when you get some freedom expanding resources. Thanks."

Dear Friend,

Thanks for writing. Few people let us know why they make these decisions and it is helpful to get some feedback, even if it is not necessarily positive. However I must admit that I am confused. Just about everything that here at TCPC over the last few years has been about promoting the very values that you write about. Over fifteen years ago we decided that if Christianity did not change and begin to focus on the teachings of Jesus rather than on creeds and religiosity nothing was going to change in our world. Since then we have been promoting a new kind of Christianity that focuses on compassion, kindness, nonviolence, forgiveness, non-judgment and other Jesus' teachings, as well as learning how to live in a "boundary-less" world. We believe that Jesus left us a path to experience a different world, and to experience a different reality.

We have just completed and are now distributing a children's curriculum that teaches the very values that you seem to be speaking of. We invested over $100,000 to create this curriculum through donations like your, along with some outside funding. It took three challenging years to create this beautiful educational package and frankly we are very proud of the way it turned out. We did that because concluded that we would have to start this process of change with our children or there will never be a significant change in the world. We have now sold over 200 units of this material and the orders are still coming in. The feedback that we are getting from teachers who are now working with this curriculum has been overwhelmingly positive. Many have reported that this is the best curriculum that they have ever worked with and that they, the teachers, are learning so much preparing to use it with their children. Some people are using it in their homes and small groups they have formed.

We are now working on adult materials for small groups and house churches based on the same teachings. We continue to try to distinguish ourselves from those who call themselves progressive who are concerned only about particular social justice issues because we believe that it must begin with our deep seated understanding about who and what we are as not only as Christians but as human beings.

You have been a long and faithful supporter but I am not certain what other things specifically we could be doing with our small organization at this time. As you know if it were not for contributions from our affiliates and thousands of hours of volunteer work, including my own, we could not accomplish what we have done already. So I thank you for your past support and hope that I hear from you again sometime. Maybe you could write those "freedom expanding resources" and we could help you distribute them.

Warmly, Fred

Showing the Gifts - gay people among our community

I thought I would pre-populate this blog with a few of my writings previously 
done. This one is a sermon that I gave at Christ Church Vienna, Austria shortly before moving back to America in 2004. In the weeks previous to my sermon one of our priests, a Nigerian, had delivered a sermon in which he proclaimed homosexuality an "abomination." I asked if I could do a sermon, not as a response in particular but as a different view - but I privately committed to preach from the Readings. As the Holy Spirit would have it, the lectionary came up with Acts 10 - and it turned out to be the perfect reading for the occasion. By the way, Jim Adams - who helped found TCPC - is the priest mentioned in the story of Bill Lander's last communion.

Sermon: Christ Church Vienna, 9 May 2004
William H. Dannenmaier

May the words of my mouth and the meditations of my heart be ever pleasing in thy sight, O Lord.

Unaccustomed as I am to dressing up for church…

My friends, let me tell you what I am doing up here and where I hope to go. I am up here because I will be leaving you soon, probably in early July. I believe it was not happenstance that brought me here. As someone who accepts both the modern concept of relativity and the ancient concept of significant time, I believe I was a member of this community before I arrived, even before I was born, that I was a member while I was here, and that I will be a member after I leave.

To use an analogy from science, Christian communities can act like strong gravitational points, planets for example, that alter the courses of passing bodies, sometimes pulling stray asteroids into tight permanent orbits, sometimes drawing them in, increasing their velocity, and flinging them off on a new trajectory. At Christ Church I have seen people brought into tight orbit and I have seen people strengthened in their faith and taking off in new directions.

In fact community is something bound up tightly with the mission of Christianity since the very beginning. In today’s Gospel Jesus gives a new commandment: “Love one another.” If we do this the world will be able to tell who we are, a Christian community. He really couldn’t be more clear: “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” And I believe that we have shared that love here. This is where I am going with this talk, a focus on the body of Christ as resurrected in the gathered community and its hoped-for effect on the individuals who fly by.

Our reading from Acts this morning speaks to communities. Peter is trying to explain to his colleagues how he came to bring the gospel to the Gentiles. The idea of “us” being in fellowship with “them.” A big part of Judaism at that time was not being dirtied by hanging out with them.

I know that we, as a group of Gentiles, think of this as no big deal. “Why wouldn’t anyone want us to be a part of the group.” But this was a fundamental change.

Judaism is at least in principal a family relationship, everyone descended from Abraham and Sarah.

An idea that still survives. Some two thousand years after Peter’s conversation I was watching television in Nashville, Tennessee, and saw a secular Jew, Teddy Bart, interviewing an old rabbi. Teddy was asking all these esoteric intellectual questions when finally the old rabbi brought him to earth. “Teddy, remember our mother Sarah.” He said. And immediately Teddy was brought back to the core of who he was. And this was two thousand years after Peter, with the Diaspora, the second Diaspora, and all the horrors of the twentieth century in between.

Opening the community up to the Gentiles was no small change. It was difficult and it probably seemed unnatural. Peter expands the idea of the community from just people who are alike to people who are different from one another. Everybody doesn’t agree on everything but they appreciate each other’s gifts in the spirit. The proof of membership, entry into the community, is the gift of the spirit and it is the only proof necessary to enter the community.

Acts says that Peter was able to convince people quickly, in one conversation. Over the last few months, on this question of who is in the community, I have failed to persuade like Peter.

You see, like Peter I have witnessed the Holy Spirit many times through my gay Christian friends. Jim, a priest at a former parish, who was inspiring and nurturing, and preached the Gospel in a way that brought the light to many people. Ron and Art, who have lived together for about twenty years and have supported each other as Ron has sought and achieved ordination.

One of the most spirit-filled men I knew was named Bill Landers. Bill taught Sunday School, served on the church council, and was active in almost every area of the church. The Easter before he died he oversaw the decoration of our church. He made a floral arrangement that burst forward from the center of our church’s plain wooden cross. It was a beautiful, if temporary, representation of the resurrection. White lilies bursting out like rays of light from the heart of the cross. Few who looked at it were not moved. Bill was a lawyer at the Department of Justice, he was in his early forties, and he was an openly gay member of the church.

A couple days before Bill died Ben (who was then four years old) and I visited him in the hospital. Bill was almost completely wasted away by AIDS. The priest dropped by with Eucharist for Bill, Ben, and me-- perhaps Bill’s last. I remember the look in his eyes as Bill took up the host and focussed on it. He was so weak, his mouth was dry, his body wracked with all the pain that AIDS brings, his hands shook as he put the host in his mouth.

A few days later, when Bill was dead, we put his body in the nave of our church to lie in state before the burial, not the normal practice in America. Bill’s fellow church council members stood watch in turn through the night. My watch was from 12 until 4 in the morning, sitting in the big empty nave, quiet and dark, no one but me and Bill’s body, I walked around the empty church, I read over Compline and the Psalms. My friends, God was there, I do not doubt.

If a gift of the spirit is faith I believe I witnessed that faith from Bill. I will not browbeat you on this topic. If your culture or experience has never allowed you to witness the same, I only ask you to keep your eyes and hearts open to what God will show you.

But it is so difficult to overcome our culture. I come from America, home of public piety and mindless excess. I have now lived in Central Europe, largely absent of overt piety yet mindful of social obligations. Neither culture fits the Christian model.

This problem points to a tension. “I would like to be a part of my culture but I would also like to be true to my religious experience.” We cannot do both easily, the demands of our culture are adherence to a set of understandings. My father once said “every group has its norms, and punishes anyone falls below those norms and it also punishes anyone who rises above those norms.” Jesus certainly found this to be true. Down through history every place where his message has been preached new adherents have suffered from ostracism or martyrdom for attempting to rise above group norms. Challenging the culture does not win you points. Try breaking off from a company ski weekend to go to church, or go to America and challenge public piety—see what you get.

Many of us here in Vienna can identify with this. In the last four years I have been in the presence of a room full of Americans only once. A beer at the local U.S. Marine Barracks. I was taken back by the difference in opinions between me and my countrymen. I see it elsewhere too. Lately my cousin in America has taken to calling me a traitor in his emails. Am I a traitor, or just different? I wasn’t in America for the questionable election, the crash of the economy, the collapse of the towers, the crash into the Pentagon, the anthrax in the Senate, the sniper on the beltway, or the fear that inspired the war.

But I have the sneaking suspicion that it is my Christianity, not my absence from America, that informs my opinions. Many practicing Christians, like Christ, are rejected in our native cultures. And we always have been.

Early Christians quickly gathered themselves into communities. Communities that often crossed country borders and vast expanses of land. Look in the first chapters of the letters to the Romans, Corinthians, Philippians, Collossians, and Thessalonians and you will find Paul, plagued and rejected over and over as he makes his journey through life, writing back to express his joy and comfort at the communities that had supported him. The communities that had pulled him in, empowered him, and sent him out.

Philippians at the 3rd verse of the 1st chapter is a good example:
“3I thank my God every time I remember you. 4In all my prayers for all of you, I always pray with joy 5because of your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now, 6being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion…

He hasn’t seen them for a while, he may never see them again, but they empower him and support him. I understand what Paul is saying here.

Earlier in my life when I was living from hand to mouth with very few signs of future success; a community of Episcopalians took me in in the little town of Clarksville, Tennessee. And I know there aren’t many Episcopalians in here, but let me tell you, the idea of an Episcopal church taking someone in is rather rare. But these were special people, People able to see past the callowness of my youth and give me food, shelter, and spiritual guidance.

Later, in a church on Capitol Hill in Washington, I grew into a Christian able to teach and help others. I hold these people, too, in my heart. And, like Paul, I fire off an occasional email to them. Though I guess he used quill and parchment.

Just as Paul was empowered by the communities he passed through, we, too, should act upon the empowerment we receive here. Perhaps we are called to stand up for the radical message of Jesus Christ in our cultures, to say out loud, “I may be from here, but I do not have to act the way you expect me to act.” I wish someone had said that in Iraq a few months ago. The revelation that Jesus Christ brought to this planet both frees and challenges us—perhaps to challenge our culture and face rejection.

Look around you at the faces of the people in this congregation. Does anyone really belong to the culture of their birth? America, Canada, England, Wales, Scotland, South Africa, Australia, Ghana, Nigeria, France, Germany, yes, we even have a few Austrians among us, but are they in some ways outside of their culture just by crossing the threshold of this church? I always hear the tone and tune of where you are from when you speak to me, but your words are always here and now—my family, my friends, my community.

We gather as a new group, not a fixed group, but a mostly transitory group with a few fixed members. In this way we are not just community, but a family of wanderers. We are drawn in, we spin around, sometimes we are flung off with more power. You did this for me and my family.

In parting I abide in what Paul said in the first chapter of Romans “11I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong-- 12that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by eachother's faith.”

To summarize, I will leave you, but I will remember you. I will long to see you, but I will be empowered by you long after I am gone.

Amen.

TypePad Conversations » Answer this question!

Moving Beyond Skepticism

By: Mike Scott

We in the West have become accustomed to look for truth on the outside. It’s become a natural assumption for us to think of truth principally as something “out there,” and it seldom occurs to us that if there is any truth (or reality; “reality” and “truth” are synonyms), it must dwell inside as well as outside. But since truth is on the inside too, it is readily accessible to us in an intimate way that “outside truth,” in principle, is not.

Since the rise of modern science, the dominating intellectual tradition in the West has been externalism, or objectification. So pervasive a force has this been that it has influenced even the most qualitative of domains: psychology, as may be seen in the behavioralism in the 19th century, which attempted to confine, by method if not even by theory, the meaning of a person’s mental states to their external behavior. Though behavioralism declined, in present day not a few people will attempt to explain love, meaning, and morality exclusively in terms of biological evolution, equating (or confusing) evolutionary function with existential content.

Obviously this kind of bias has also made its way into our epistemology too. Logical positivism, for instance, holds that only statements which refer to quantified, empirical results are meaningful. But generally we can see the results of this bias latent in our own assumptions about reality. Intellectually we have relegated subjectivity, qualia, and sensation to a status of either secondary reality or even non-reality. The objective world becomes synonymous with what is “really” going on, whereas the subjective world is at best a shadow. Thus we have inherited a lopsided view of reality: an outside with no inside. Objectivity, when taken to an extreme (and it has), seeks to exclude the subject and make an object out of everything, including reality as a whole. But since there is no such “view from nowhere” or “God’s eye view” available to us, this naturally leads only to endless skepticism with no place to begin a spiritual practice.

What helped me move beyond Western skepticism was realizing that there is more to reality than objectivity. Don’t get me wrong, objectivity is an invaluable tool. But its value lies precisely in that it is a tool, and not an ultimate end in itself. The experiential side of reality just as real. And for each of us as subjects (as opposed to objects), it is even more real, since it is direct, immediate, and intimate. Reading a billion volumes on eyesight could never replace the intimate experience of seeing. If forced to make a choice, I’d rather be completely ignorant of how it objectively works, if it would mean I could know firsthand that it works and what it is like, which is a pure and direct “revelation.” After reading a billion volumes, I’d still never know what it is to see. There is, therefore, more to reality and truth than words and objectivity can convey. In other words, the intimacy of experience brings us in contact with an aspect of truth that is fundamentally ineffable.

This creates a distinction between knowledge as abstraction (i.e. knowledge 'about' something; circumscribing and defining an external object) and knowledge as intimacy (unity, experience: “direct” knowledge without which the other type of knowledge is left impotent, having ultimately no referent).

Now logic itself can only get one so far. Reason is indeed a light that we cannot do without, but (to borrow a phrase I read somewhere) as a light it cannot illumine itself. No logical system, no philosophical system of thought, can be truly complete or inclusive of all truth. Reason, especially systematic thought, are exclusive. Knowledge is exclusive by nature. We understand some things to the exclusion of others. More pointedly: we understand some things precisely because we exclude the others. Like a camera we bring one object into focus only to blur out the rest of the picture. Or as Zen Master Dogen said, when one side is lighted, the other becomes dark. Ultimately we can say that we understand some things precisely because we do not understand everything. And if we claim to understand everything, then we've understood nothing at all.

Realizing, then, this fundamental inability of words and logic to capture reality, we are left with an essential mystery as to the nature of existence (the positivists might claim, of course, that “existence” is a meaningless term). Not a mystery in the sense of a logical riddle to be figured out, but an intrinsic, abiding mystery that can only be experienced and lived: a mystery in principle. Once one realizes there are aspects of reality that are, as such, fundamentally beyond the reach of the scientific method, then one may become open to the possibility, if not the necessity, of religious truth.

This is the beginning of my approach to religion. You might call it existentialism, and to a degree that is right; however, I turn to religion for my existential concerns because that is where humankind has been dealing with these issues for thousands of years. That is where I have found wisdom and not mere knowledge.

We all have faith in something. Secularists included. We draw meaning from everywhere to establish our sense of identity. This identity cannot be proved through logic or the scientific method alone. Now, science is something I take very seriously, so seriously that I‘ve devoted much energy into thinking about its purpose and its limitations. Science itself is not the problem; the problem is that our philosophy and worldview can, and do, get in the way of our ability to be spiritual people. In the modern, objective Western world, nothing is sacred. We've turned the world into an object and distanced ourselves from the inner experience of life. Then we despair that the sacred can't be found anywhere since we've looked under every rock and peered billions of light-years into space. Time is just time, space is just space, people are just people, and if it suits us, they are all objects to be used, manipulated, wrung out for profit, and ultimately ignored. Most of us are resisting having to arrive at such a conclusion, but not many of us know why and how not to. There is a reason we Westerners live in the constant fear of falling into nihilism, but the problem is not with science or even with objectivity; is it in how we have come to relate to what we call reality.

From the lesson on Jesus as a teacher of the way

This is an excerpt from our children's curriculum from the lesson on Jesus.

Here is what we practice today as progressive Christians who follow the path of Jesus:

• We believe that seeing all as ONE is how we can experience the realm of God.
• We believe that joy is not dependent on material success or outward circumstance.
• We trust the Spirit that flows through us and all people.
• We create moments of stillness in which we quiet the chatter of the mind.
• We accept responsibility for our actions and for changing our ways if we cause harm.
• We forgive those who have harmed us and let go of our anger.
• We do not judge others.
• We have compassion for all beings.
• We are generous of our heart and our possessions.
• We try not to worry about what we don’t have, about the future, or about the past.
• We help those that are in danger or are suffering however we can.

• We celebrate and laugh, and we live in joy and wonder.

Any thoughts?

The Open Sea

By: Sara

Do you remember the first time you were ever exposed to progressive Christianity? Were you SO excited? Did you find yourself, like me, flooded with relief to discover that there really was a way to reconcile your experiences and knowledge with your spirituality and your faith? I am new to progressive Christianity, although as I look back I see that I have always been on this path. My journey has lead me through quite a few years of knowing what I rejected – legalism, hypocrisy, intolerance, dogmatism, … but it wasn’t until finding TCPC that I could in any fashion, articulate what it was that I affirmed. So, it is here where some of my struggles end, but also where new struggles begin…
First, let me lay out some context: My life before consisted of rules, which, if followed, were supposed to make me “right with God”. My life before consisted of having neat little categories for everything – my systematic theology was clearly defined and I had all the answers. But I was that clanging gong – I had no love. I said I followed Jesus, but I had become a lover of my own belief system, rather than a true lover of my neighbor. But then life came in and shook me around like a squeaky dog toy and my “rules” began to seem inconsistent with living a life of joy, of compassion, of love. My neat little boxes had become stifling. My life had become about what you Knew, rather than about how you Lived. So that was what I had to walk away from.

It was at this point that TCPC came into my life and some wonderful caring, individuals who assured me I was growing, despite my inability to coherently converse about what was happening. So I grew. But just the other day I found myself looking back at the “old me” with a kind of sentimentality and I wondered why. Here is this momentous change occurring in my mind and heart but I found myself foolishly yearning for that which I no longer have – absolutes. Now I know this sounds absurd, so let me explain.

John A. Shedd once wrote “A ship in the harbor is safe, but that is not what ships were built for.” I have left my old spiritual harbor, and I KNOW this is the right path for me. Of that I have no question. My ship feels sturdy and the wind is at my back. But, back there in the harbor, I felt safe -- even though I fully acknowledge that the safety I felt then came more from ignorance and legalism. What a basic, powerful human need it is to feel safe! To know. To have an answer. I think I’m still wrapping my head around finding security and peace in this mysterious process of growing in love, rather than pursuing the “right” answers. But it’s hard -- All I have ever known up until now have been absolutes, and even knowing now that the absolutes were incorrect for me, I still miss them. Silly, isn’t it!

So, today I stand on the deck of my ship. I have left the harbor behind and I think I will stop looking back. What mystery, or adventure, heartache or revelation might await me on the open sea? I know not. Only that I was made to find out.

TypePad Conversations » Answer this question!

Music

By: Deshna

I have been thinking a lot about music lately.  It is a thread that connects the present to the past, a thread that travels from and between culture to culture, a thread that ties us all together, pulling us into community.  What human doesn't love some form of music, now, today, ever? 

When I was a child, I went to church each Sunday.  I enjoyed the sense of community, of extended family, of a web of support, but didn't really connect to the stories of the Bible- it didn't really speak my language.  But you know what did speak to me (other than those great sermons by Pastor Fred)? The music.  The choir, the piano, the violins, drums, the voices.   They brought tears to eyes nearly every week.  My favorite part of church was always when we all held hands, closed our eyes and sang a sweet slow alleluia together.  Even as a child (especially as a child?), I could feel the energy passing through our hands and the music.

Yes, music has been a part of my everyday life since the day I was born.  Isn't that true for everyone in some way?

A few years ago, I was facing one of those moments in life when you question everything, when you climb out of the card board box, as Gretta Vosper says it, and I felt as if everything I knew to be true was shattering. I was scared and confused.  I began walking up to the mountain near our house every day that I could.  One day, at a particular near crazy moment, I was singing quietly to myself as I walked up to Mount Tabor.  As I sang this song that had been a favorite of mine since high school- Closer to Fine, by the Indigo Girls- a song that I have sung thousands of times, whose lyrics I know by heart, all of a sudden the words took on a whole new and expanded meaning for me. 

"I went to the Doctor, I went to the mountains, I looked to the children, and I drank from the fountains...there is more than one answer to these questions, pointing me in a crooked line...and the less I seek my source, the closer I am to fine."

Well, in that moment, singing that song- it was me, it was my story.  I realized how many people all over the world, felt that same way, listening to that same song and feeling like, yeah, that's me.

For I had gone to the Doctor, a few of them actually.

I went to the mountains almost every day seeking answers and solitude. 

I watched my daughter and her friends playing, and I looked for answers in their joy and fearlessness, their way of being completely present.

I have drank from fountains and more. 

And of course, as one must, in order to move on, I realized that what I was looking for was within me, is within each of us. 

I soon saw that there is always more than one answer to the questions you ask.  How can there be one answer, when in each moment there are infinite possibilities?

Lines are rarely straight. 

And finally I understood the words: "the less I seek my source..." as I began to belt out the song, unconcerned what people passing by thought of me.  Sometimes, when you spend so much energy seeking and you are begging for answers, when you are desperate for some connection to something outside yourself, desperate for a relationship with some higher power, the answers will not come and you will be left feeling in want.  You will be left feeling very alone.  Sometimes, the less you seek and the more you pause, the closer you are to fine.

On Getting Saved By Jesus

Another interesting email exchange!

To: [email protected]

Subject: On getting saved by Jesus

Hello.

Recently I was saved and found my salvation through Jesus. However, the church I attend (which shall remain nameless), despite having great people in it, has parts that I believe the Bible disagrees with.

As a recent convert, I have questions.

1. Are we supposed to give 10% of our earnings to the Church?

2. What makes Progressive Christianity different from more Bible-based Christianity?

3. Do you consider it a religion?

Subject: RE: On getting saved by Jesus

Although your questions are obviously sincere and important to you they are too large for me to answer in a brief email. Some of the questions that you ask have been debated by religious folks for nearly 2000 years. I cannot do them justice here.

However let me say that Progressives do not treat the Bible as the inerrant "word of God" but see it rather as a document that was created by humans to record their evolving understanding and experiences with the Divine, the Holy, or what we sometimes call God today.  Progressive Christians have by and large abandoned the idea that Jesus died for our sins (atonement theology) and see atonement as part of several mythologies that were prevalent during Jesus' time and were wrapped around the historical Jesus who was probably a revered Rabbi and was killed by the authorities for his radical views.

Yes, to answer your question about earnings, there is something in the Bible about the importance of tithing and over the years that has been interpreted as 10% of pretax earnings by the conservative Christians.  Of course the same Bible says that men should not cut our sideburns,  cannot eat certain foods, should kill our children if they insult their parents and a whole lot of other things that the Bible folks conveniently ignore. Sadly the result has been some very wealthy pastors who got that way off the backs of a lot of people who could not afford it. We do believe in living with a generous heart but not because of the Bible but because we believe in an abundant universe and to share of ourselves gives us satisfaction.

If you are really serious about learning more about progressive Christianity read more of the articles on our website and I suggest that you read three or four of the books that we feature on our site. I would start with The God I No Longer Believe In, The Historical Jesus for Beginners, and Jesus Reconsidered and regarding the Bible, Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman. I would also recommend any book by Marcus Borg, especially his book, Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time or anything by Bishop Spong.  If you are comfortable with your new salvation than pay your 10% and go no further. However if you are truly interested in learning about how the church changed the Jesus message  than I suggest you do some serious studying.

I leave you with this thought. One of the things that probably got Jesus killed by the authorities was has his belief that one did not have to be cleansed in the temple nor did one need an agent or broker or an intercessor to have relationship with Alaha or God, as we call it today. He told his followers that when they have done harm to another or to themselves the needed to repent. That is to make amends and change their actions and when they did those things sincerely (with heart and mind) they were giving a clean slate by God. It seems very strange to me that an entire religion based on Jesus' life and teachings could be created with the idea that we needed his suffering and death to have communion with God. 

If it make sense to you than go with it in peace.

I hope this is helpful.

Fred

Time for Some Change

Following is an unedited email exchange between our President, Fred, and a TCPC visitor.  Great conversation and a reminder of why we do what we do.

To: [email protected]

Subject: Progressive Christianity (in general).

This might be an odd email, and if you happen to view it as such, please bear with me.  Although, before I ramble, I should start with this:

I stumbled into your website this evening - through means I will casually describe below - and have found everything to be refreshing.  Only recently have I attempted to reconcile my fundamentalist upbringing with the realities that are embedded in this world, and to examine all of the available resources here is simply wonderful.  Thank you.

This evening I was reading ('The Fidelity of Betrayal' by Peter Rollins), and, while researching a few points that Rollins' makes, I stumbled into a website called "Apprising Ministries".  This website - one that I have familiarized myself with in the past - seems to stop at nothing from defending their viewpoint of the 'Truth' of Christianity.  In doing so, there is a derisive and inflammatory tone juxtaposed into every sentiment regarding those that represent Christianity in the wrong 'light'.  Most prominently, "emergent" figures such as Rob Bell, Peter Rollins, Brian McLaren, etc. are attacked.  And, due to my fascination with Bell and Rollins' thoughts in particular, I not only find myself offended at some of the assertions, but oddly enough, study them for two reasons: a) to obtain an understanding of why people blaspheme Bell, and b) to understand where I need to be critical of what I am studying.

At any rate, the post I read tonight took a shot at your website.  Given that a link was provided, I wandered over here.  As stated above, I am refreshed.  The "8 Points" section is brilliant, and the resources provides a solid foundation from which to work with.

As I become more and more submersed in my journey as a Christian, I will undoubtedly utilize the resources you have provided.  I have been 'emergent' or 'progressive' long before I knew how those concepts related to Christianity, and it is a great joy to realize there is so much out there to help me with my journey.

I suppose this email could have been much shorter had I simply said "Thank You," but that is not at all my style.

In Christ,

- A.

Dear A.,

Thank you for your kind note.  I think your analysis is correct. Organizations like Appraising Ministries represent a large percentage of Christians who are unable or unwilling to test the primary paradigm," of the roots of Christianity and how do they speak to us today?"  They are holding on for dear life to a mythology that was had been part of many religions of region during Jesus' time and even centuries after. They have their own truth about the bible and the personhood of Jesus and believe that theirs is the only truth. They cannot see things differently because their religion is also their cosmology and their operative myth. It makes their life work.

People like Rob Bell, Peter Rollins and even Brian McLaren are primarily speaking to folks who are trying to make a transition from the old Christianity but do not want to give up the uniqueness of Jesus as part of a plan by God. They want to believe that Jesus did something personally for us, besides giving us a model and teachings.  In short they are trying to have the new church emerge out of old wine skins. They are performing an important task in this important transition.

Then there are those who believe that we have to start over with the entire Christian story that in large part eliminates the dualism that has been part of the Christian traditions since the Greeks "Romanized" it in the first century.  It is time to give up on the "God up there" and ask what was Jesus really trying to teach us. Ultimately these folks often realize that the question is not what must we do to please God or Jesus but how do we live our lives so that we can see, hear and experience that divine in all things.  We(I) tend to fall more into that category.

It is a very dynamic time and is moving so fast it is hard to keep up with but it is lot of fun.  Keep reading and thinking and I hope you enjoy your journey.

Thanks again for writing. I am glad you have found us helpful.

Warmly, Fred

Thoughts on Forgiveness

This blog is a discussion we at TCPC have been having on forgiveness as we work on one of our Children's Curriculum lessons on forgiveness.  Here are the thoughts of one of our board members- Janice Gregory- on forgiveness.  Your thoughts?

Since our meeting in Chicago, I’ve been studying forgiveness – and I have come to some conclusions that I think we should consider for our forgiveness lesson(s) in the children’s curriculum.

I think that my concerns can be met, and the lesson(s) on forgiveness improved, by paying more attention to what forgiveness is – and what it is not.  

As you may recall, I was concerned that a Sunday school teacher could unwittingly do harm by urging a child simply to forgive a hurt inflicted by another person.  If, for example, the other person were an abusive adult, the child could be put in the position of returning to this person only to receive more abuse, and of thinking that that was the only “right” thing for them to do.  Teachers themselves may be confused.  For example, there are far too many stories of clergy urging a woman to return to an abusive husband in order to preserve the sanctity of the marriage.

In my inquiries, I found most helpful a book entitled The Art of Forgiving by Lewis B. Smedes (Ballantine: 1996).  Much of what follows is taken from that book.

Let us begin with what forgiveness is NOT.

It is not reunion.  I think we often believe that forgiveness is like kissing and making up.  It is not.  If we are in a situation such as in the examples above, we should get out of there as quickly as possible.

It is not forgetting what has happened or assuming everything can be restored to where it was before the hurt was inflicted.   If someone has broken trust with us, then that trust is broken and would have to be re-earned before it could be restored.  If a co-worker is fired for good reason, we can forgive what they did, but that does not mean they should be re-hired.

It does not mean that we excuse what was done, take the edge off any evil committed, or give up our right to justice.  

The quotes at the end of this note from Desmond Tutu might explain these points better.

So, then, what is forgiveness, and when is it an appropriate course of action?

It is giving up the hope of a different past.  The first step is to recognize that we have been wronged and to name that wrong and who committed the wrong.  If we cannot do these things, then there is nothing to forgive.

It is surrendering our right to get even.  This is the nub of how forgiveness heals.  This is how the “love channels of the heart get unclogged” to borrow the imagery of Madison’s four-year-old parishioner.  A good example is to look at a situation where you are not in a position to exact vengeance on the offender.  So you spend your life in hatred, and the person who hurt you is in fact still in control of your heart.

Forgiveness is an option to us when –

1. Someone takes an action that seriously wrongs us
2. That person meant to take that action
3. That person initiated the action

That person is, in essence, to blame for the wrong done to us.  If there is no blame, there is nothing to forgive.

Finally, how do we forgive?

Smedes suggests a process of (1) rediscovering the humanity of the person who hurt us, (2) giving up on vengeance (but not on justice), and (3) revising our feelings toward the person so that we can wish them well in the future.

Desmond Tutu’s speech “We Forgive You” published in The Rainbow People of God (1994) includes a statement that “The victims of injustice and oppression must be ever ready to forgive.”  But regarding the oppressed and the oppressor coming together, he says, “Those who have wronged [us] must be willing to make what amends they can…..If I have stolen your pen, I can’t really be contrite when I say, ‘Please forgive me’ if at the same time I keep your pen.  If I am truly repentant, then I will demonstrate this genuine repentance by returning your pen.  Then [reunion], which is always costly, will happen…It can’t happen just by saying ‘Let bygones be bygones.’”

This is because forgiveness is something that is done by a single person, while reunion or reconciliation is something that necessarily involves two persons in relationship.  We can forgive without trusting the person we have forgiven will change their behavior; in reunion we must have trust they will not hurt us again.

The difference between forgiveness and reconciliation is also why we must truly repent before we can ask for God’s forgiveness:  What we really are asking is that we be restored to our right relationship with God, and that is a relationship question.

God Talk

By: Fred Plumer

Below is part of my response to a conversation that we are having here at TCPC, between many different people on the subject of God in progressive Christianity.  As we finish up the last lessons for the TCPC Children's Curriculum Project, we find that we need to find some language for What or Who is God? And how do we talk to our children about that when, in reality, no one really knows....

"I think that I would word your statement a little differently (Jesus is NOT an incarnation of God). I think we may be talking about degrees here. There is no clear teaching on this issue for Progressives and since we do not have a creed or dogma, I don’t think in my life time there will be such a statement. However many of us who see Jesus as a teacher of a “Way.” That “Way” was offered to those who wanted to manifest “God,” Sacred Unity ( Aramaic for God,) Creative Mystery, The One, etc in their lives as Jesus had done-to experience the Realm of God(Kingdom of God) or Realm of Sacred Unity. When one says that Jesus was the incarnation of God, the implication is that he was something so special that only he (and maybe a few others depending on one’s belief system) can have the same experience. These people become gods to be worshiped. Then we get into the question of how was he different than other humans who had chosen to live their lives in unconditional love, others who manifested God-energy. How much is a saint, how much is a prophet and how much is “God Incarnate?”  

Yes, there are those people who develop the desire, the discipline, the practices and the awareness that allows them to see and hear this Creative/Loving energy in all things, in all life. Their lives have been permanently altered and they usually spend the rest of their lives with eyes to see and the ears things the rest of us merely get a glance of now and then. Do we call them God incarnate? Or are there some unique humans who have had such a profound experience of that “Mysterious Realm,” that their lives were never again the same? In short I believe incarnation is a loaded word and implies things that send the wrong message. One that we can even attempt to understand “God” and two that we can decide which one is the actual an incarnation of a God…a God we cannot understand or fathom.  I have no problem with the idea that Jesus was unusual in the amount of that “Creative Mystery” that he embodied and manifested. However, I would not want to suggest that this same opportunity was not available to anyone. After all he is quoted as saying that greater things than he did were possible in us.

One caveat. Ken Wilber suggests that every drop of experience has three dimensions—I, we, and it—which provides three very different ways of relating to God: speaking about God in 3rd-person, speaking with God in 2nd-person, and speaking as God in 1st-person. And while these dimensions of the divine can be found in just about any spiritual lineage—Christian, Buddhist, Jewish, Hindu, Islam, etc.—many of these traditions explicitly emphasize only one or two of these perspectives, resulting in one or more important aspects of spirituality often being left out of their conceptions of God.

Each of these faces of God may open into each of the other faces – but the 1st person opens us up to an experience of God as divine lover, before whom I want to surrender. This is the face of God that brings the ego/contracted/small self to its knees and drops us into Ultimate, Unfathomable Mystery - thus helping us not to confuse any of our constructs with ultimate reality.

I am not certain if this will clarify your question but we are trying to understand and “unfathomable Mystery” after all."

THE LAST CHRISTIAN

By: Adrian Gibb

14th October 2084

I am the last christian!

Ron died this morning, so I am the last! Of course, nobody knows this. Maybe a decade ago you could declare yourself a person of faith, if you were brave enough, but not today. It would be, almost literally, insanity to do so. Not that Ron or I would have been thrown into jail or tortured for our belief, but we would be seen to be as deranged as those, in my mother's youth, who declared themselves to be Julius Caesar or abducted by aliens. We would be ridiculed, mocked, perhaps even ostracised, and I have a career and a reputation I don't wish to lose. No I can't declare myself a christian, even though I am the last, I just can't, can I?

You see, though I hate to admit me, I have started to ask myself if maybe I am deranged? How can my belief, on an intellectual level, be tenable, if literally the rest of the world has abandoned it? How can I still hold my faith to be true and real when I am the only one who feels its reality and truth? My faith, once adhered to by the majority on this planet, is now like a river in drought. Its shell still stands, its structure can be seen, and what it once was is obvious, but the life has ceased to flow through its walls, and it crumbles, thirsty for droplets of purpose. I have to face facts, Dawkinsism is the philosophy of the world now. Faith is dead, everybody else can see that, by I still pray. Why?

I hate myself for my wishes! I wish I didn't read the gospels and tingle with inspiration. I wish I didn't see Jesus as the face of God, and believe in an empty tomb. I wish I didn't feel the presence, the real and tangible presence of the limitless divine when I pray, or watch a sunset, or give my last five dollars to a homeless man. I hate myself for wishing that the love I feel caress me when I think of a man who lived over two thousand years ago would go away. I wish these things. I wish they could just leave my mind, and that science and logic and reason and all that the rest of humanity feels comfortable with would satisfy me. But it doesn't! And my wishes remain just that. Hateful wishes.

So what do I do? Do I accept the will of the masses and reject my faith, a faith that lives though I wish it to die? Do I declare my faith, with pride, with strength, and suffer the consequences? I would no doubtedly lose many of my clients, my boss, an ardent Dawkinsite, would probably sack me, and some may even suggest I have lost my mind. But so what, that doesn't matter right? I may be the last one, I may be the only one, but that doesn't mean my faith is not real! Right? It would be worth it! Even if I lost everything, it would be worth it. But would it? What if I am wrong? What if I am deranged? What would I be right, me, worthless me, and the rest of the world wrong? The numbers don't add up, do they?

So tell me, dear reader from who knows where, or when, what should I do? Please tell me, what would you do?

Talking About My Faith as a Progressive Christian

By Fred Plumer

I was sitting on an airplane last month reading a book by Calvin Mercer called Slaves to Faith. Mercer is a former fundamentalist Christian who has been “born again” as a competent theologian and university professor of religion. When he realized what he had been through and how hard it had been to break free, he became fascinated by the fundamentalist mind. At one point his interest was so great that he returned to school got a graduate degree in clinical psychology and was in private practice for over a decade. His book is wonderful primer on understanding the fundamentalist perspective on theology, the bible and Jesus the Christ. In this book, he also offers a psychological profile on the fundamentalist mind with some limited suggestions on how progressives Christians and others might dialogue with them.

When my seat mate saw the title of the book, he assumed that that title referred to the “born again Christian’s” commitment to Christ. In other words he thought we were on the same page. With a smile he said: “Wasn’t great when you have finally made that commitment? “ Now, whenever something like this has happened in the past I usually make some remark that assures this person that first, I am more educated than he is or she is, and second, we don’t agree. Although that does not always work it usually does and at least give me the first punch in what may be an uncomfortable ride at 30,000 ft.

This time I just smiled and asked him what he meant by that question. It took him less than five minutes to articulate how his life had changed when a friend took him to his evangelical church and within three months he had committed his life to Christ as his lord and savior. His next question was; “When were you born again?”

I had to think about my response since it was a full flight and we still had two and half hours left. So, I simply said, “I not certain what you mean by that?” I actually had become interested in how he would respond to that, so I tried to listen with an open mind. I was surprised how easy it was when I made the effort not to judge or critic his comments as he was making them. I did my best to shut down the voice that wanted to make fun of his naïveté and lack of biblical training. But I became far more fascinated by how comfortable he was talking about something that was so important to him.  It was clear that he had done this before on many occasions and that he was completely at ease and if I did not evaluate what he was saying, instead of how he was saying it, it was impressive. 

I suppose it had a special impact on me because we had been working on our most recent eBulletin that deals with learning to talk about progressive Christianity. Of course it will always be difficult to talk about one’s faith when we are talking about great mysteries and a lot of questions that will never be answered because they are dealing with issues and things beyond our comprehension. 

But is that hard to refer to Christianity as a path rather than a belief system-a path that is guided by love rather than fear? Is it hard to explain that this is a path that is more interested in fulfillment than it is in atonement? Is it that difficult to say that you have faith in a God or Divine Spirit or Sacred Unity or whatever you choose to call this energy-an energy that is part of all creation and is in and part of each and everyone one of us? Is it too difficult to say I don’t know how it works because it is beyond my comprehension but I know when I live my life a certain way, including intentional spiritual practices my life is more abundant, less anxious, more peaceful, less fearful, and at the end of each day, more joyful? Of course this begs the question. Do we really try and walk path? Do we have intentional spiritual practices and disciplines? Do we really believe that our path is about change and transformation? Do we think “our way” will actually lead to an experience of the Sacred or the Divine? Then why do we have such a hard time expressing ourselves and sharing our experience?

I suppose that if we really did live this way, we would have a much easier time on airplanes explaining what it means to be a progressive Christian. I would guess that if we had some of those experiences, we would have an easier time explaining what it is that we actually believe, not what it is that we don’t believe. I suspect that we would be a little more enthusiastic explaining why progressive Christianity can be a wonderful guide to one’s life.  But then if we were living it we probably would not have to explain it would we? For the record, I did explain my view of my faith and briefly shared what I saw as our differences. He looked at me like I was crazy and finally said, “That’s cool,” and went back to his computer games.  I put my seat back and took a nap…    

Will the Real Progressive Christians Please Speak Up?

By: Deshna Ubeda

Hi friends,
So, in my work for TCPC over the last 3 years- I have noticed that most progressive Christians do not really like to talk about their beliefs.  The comments on our TCPC Facebook are minimal though there are a large number of "friends;" when I am looking for articles I basically have to become a private investigator searching the world for hidden progressive Christian authors that aren't white-male-over-50; and in conversations one generally hears only two sides of the Christian perspective- those that think its a bunch of outdated crap and those that are trying to save the world, one soul at a time.

Now, before I go on, let me first say, that I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND.  I grew up in a progressive Christian church and I didn't like to talk about it either to my fundamental Christian friends- (they would just tell me that Jesus loves me and they are worried about me burning in Hell for eternity) or to my non-religious friends, who generally just cringe when the word Christian is said.  I also have to confess that when someone asks me what do I do for work, my answer is usually, "Oh, I just work for a non-profit." And then I hope they don't ask me the name.  Which they usually do, so then I have to muster up my courage to say the words CHRISTIANITY.  The hard part is not jumping into a long confusing explanation that usually goes something like: "I'm not religious at all and I don't really relate to Christianity but I believe that Jesus was an amazing teacher and that his teachings have been grossly misinterpreted, stolen for the use of fear and power, and this organization is about promoting an approach to Christianity that is based on his true teachings from an educated point of view not from a misunderstood dogmatic point of view.  I am happy to support anything that stands in opposition to the tyranny, violent, unjust, exclusive, and ignorant fundamental Christianity."  Or something like that.  At which point they either say, "oh... cool" or "interesting" or just "hmmmm..." and I hope that I haven't offended anyone on either "side" of the spectrum. 

At our last board meeting, there was a large group of us standing in line for lunch and we told another customer to go ahead due to our large number.  She smiled, surprised (it was in California, after all, where people are constantly trying to get ahead) and one of our board members (a young woman pastor of all people) said, "Yes, we are nice- we are progressive Christians!" proudly.  Every single one of us, immediately shied away and acted like we had no idea what she was talking about.  We were embarrassed- not by our beliefs- oh no- but by the fact that so few people have any idea what progressive Christianity is and so we assume that they immediately associate it with fundamental Christianity.  We are NOT one of them, we want to shout in defense.

One of the challenges is that followers of progressive Christianity haven't really even agreed on what it is.  After all, being progressive means constantly being open to change and new awareness.  God, wouldn't it be easier to just hand those people that ask "what is progressive Christianity?" a heavy, well read book and say- "this is what we are and this is what we will always be. This is THE truth."  But progressive Christians are not known for taking the easy route.  In fact, we are trying to stand up to 2000 years of dogma and 50% of the population.

We began with determining what we aren't.  We are not fundamentals, we are not exclusive, we are not dogmatic, we are not bible thumpers, we are not ignorant, we are not brainwashed, we are not afraid, we are not haters, we are not closed minded.  Slowly, we are letting go of the comparison and becoming, birthing, and re-birthing who we are separate from that negative association.  We are compassionate, we are inclusive, we are educated, we are open, we are searchers, we are peaceful, we are earth friendly, we are social justice supporters, we are Jesus' students, we are walkers...but NOT, at least not yet, talkers.  Yes, there are a handful of scholars and theologians who have helped birth this movement that are continuing to talk about it and there are even a few of those that are women but far too many of us, pastors especially, do NOT talk about it.  They, we, are afraid.  Afraid of being misunderstood, afraid of losing friends, afraid of losing church members, afraid of being associated with all that we aren't. 

At a recent workshop that I helped organize, a group from a congregation attended and was very excited about the changes they could make to modernize their worship, to clarify their beliefs, and to hopefully draw younger people to their church.  But as they walked out of the workshop, I heard the pastor say, "Did you hear Ethel, she was really upset about changing things too much...Do you think the rest will feel the same way?  I mean, I can keep wearing the skirt if that makes people more comfortable..."  She was really worried.  Maybe they would lose the over 70 year olds to the change when the pastor really started talking or, gasp, wore pants.  But guess what?  Over 70's is what our churches are going to be left with if we, as progressive Christians, don't let go of our fear, muster our courage and say the words proudly, "I am a progressive Christian! This is what I believe and I am excited to tell you about it because it has changed my life for the better!" 

So, I am asking for your help.  Please, will the real progressive Christians Stand up and Speak up?

Together we can help the world see a different Christianity, one that is based on compassion, inclusion, justice and peace.

Sitting on the Edge of the Fence

By: Fred Plumer

At the risk of letting this blog page become a message or discussion board, I feel compelled to respond to publicly to Adrian's comments since his questions are so well written, and so universal. I believe that the vast majority of people who quietly refer to themselves as Christians today, like Adrian, are also sitting and the fence. And as I visit congregations all over the country, I have discovered that many of them are trying to function with a fence down the middle of the sanctuary that is much like the ignored "elephant in the room."

Actually this fence that he refers to has been there for nearly two thousand years although ignored by the vast majority of Christians over the years. At one point, by the end of the second century, it was divided into two large camps-those who believed that Jesus was God or and those who believed he was an angelic human who had a godly nature. It turned into a battle between the followers of Bishop Athanasias and the very popular Greek priest and theologian, Arias. The divide was clearly defined at the cost of many lives in the Forth Century when Constantine demanded a unified Christianity. Over a period of several decades Bishops were called together to vote on who and what Jesus was. As it turned out, the defining moment occurred in Nicaea in 325 when the Athanasias followers were able to get a majority vote for what became the Nicene Creed. The Arians were defeated and the power-brokers bishops who favored the God/Jesus began to clean out the Arian followers. The were deemed heretics and the fully human Jesus disappeared into the mist of mythology.

Most Christians today are totally unaware that the vast majority of things they believe about the person-hood of Jesus of Nazareth are the result of a huge political struggle between the followers of Arias and politically savvy Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria. Probably one of the best accounts of this often ignored piece of our church history is covered in an excellent book by Richard E. Rubenstein, When Jesus Became God.   According to Rubenstein and others there were several votes taken in different parts of the empire, before and after Nicaea that were a very close. The struggle between these factions continued for decades in spite of the arrests, the deaths and the torture that the Arian followers faced before going underground.

What would have happened if the Arians had won the battle? What would Christianity look like today or would it even exist? That of course is a very interesting question. I would suggest that it would have been difficult to build a church institution without a Savior whose access was controlled by that same institution. But of course we will never know. 

The real issue is, what can Christianity be today? I believe the primary reason that our Christian churches are failing today is because they do not know what they believe, or more importantly, why they are in existence except to be a church. What is the purpose of the church today?

In my opinion scholars have done a pretty thorough job of deconstructing the myth of the one and only God/Jesus over the last half a century. The historical legs of Triune God have been systematically kicked out from under the stool, and most students of religious courses in our universities and seminaries are well aware of that. Scholars like Robert M. Price, Burton L. Mack and Tom Harpur among others have so thoroughly deconstructed the historical Jesus that they have even questioned if there really was a historical Jesus.

Harpur posits that the story of Jesus is no different than the story of Osiris and Horus of Egyptian mythology, right down to the virgin birth, the suffering servant, the god/human savior and the death and resurrection in three days. (The Pagan Christ) All of this information is available today to anyone who wants to do a little research. Certainly most serious clergy and seminarians have read some of these books.

The result is that a lot of main-line clergy and church leadership really do not know what to teach or why they are teaching it. The are uncomfortable teaching things they no longer believe in and they are even more uncomfortable talking about real change in positions with which people have become comfortable in their congregations. So they sit on the fence and muddle. The talk about social justice and teach about the historical Jesus but seldom confront the most serious flaws in their belief system. So the prayers stay the same; the rituals stay the same; the sermons are evasive and uninspiring and the people who were spiritual hungry, go away feeling even more hungry.

So what do we do with all of this. We get off the fence and look to see what is really there. Together we recreate a new and compelling Christology and a viable theology. What is there is a profound and beautiful path that can help us realize and actualize the truth of our tradition-that all living creatures are a spark of the divine and we have the capacity to incarnate that divinity through our faith, our mind and our actions. If we take the Christ path seriously and joyfully, we can incarnate the divine from within and begin to see the divine in others. We have both the power and destiny to deify the world. Now that is something that we can get excited about.

So what is this path. It is a way of being, of seeing and hearing our reality differently. It is contemplative and engaging. It is all right there in front of us, in spite of the efforts to bury it in depths of the early church's biases. But the one thing that I am certain-it does not start with a Savior but rather with a teacher. A very special teacher, I believe, who has been there.

I Wonder Why

By: Fred Plumer

I have often wondered why it is so important for some people to insist that Jesus is the “only way.” As you might imagine, as President of TCPC, I get angry email from “concerned Christians” on a regular basis.  The vast majority of them start off by being pretty polite.

“I agree with much of what is on your website but are you saying that perhaps the beliefs that a Muslim holds, or a Hindu holds, or a Buddhist holds, is just as true as the beliefs a Christian holds?”

It is not unusual for these same people to quote the familiar passage from John 14: 6 that was put into the mouth of Jesus by the writer of John: “No one comes to the Father except through me.”

I used to spend a lot of time trying to explain the historical context of that passage of John-the fact that it was probably written over 80 years (two generations) after Jesus’ death, that it is the least historical document in the Gospels, that it is a reflection of a tumultuous period when the followers of Jesus were being rejected in the synagogues and were no longer considered Jews by the families and friends. And this was just the beginning of the recrimination that tore apart religious leaders, social settings and families at the deepest level. When this is understood, many of the Christological sayings of the writer of John take on new meaning and make a lot more sense, including the unfortunate translation of John’s condemnation of the “Jews” which should have been translated as the “Jews who rejected us or did not accept Jesus as the messiah.”   Jesus was born a Jew and he died a Jew according to the three Synoptic Gospels.

But in every case, my efforts to try and explain how this passages came to be, have met with everything from strong disapproval to outright rage, including a couple of death threats from these concerned Christians.

What is it that makes it so important that Jesus be the only way, the only one, the initiator of the one true religion when there is so much evidence that makes this a very illogical conclusion? Is it our competitive human nature? Is it our need to be right in spite of all evidence to the contrary? Is it fear?

Why can’t we simply allow Jesus to be a human being, OK a very special human being,  who had a profound experience (or experiences) of the divine that changed his understanding of reality. My guess is that when people noticed this change, Jesus was asked to spend the rest of his short life trying to teach others how they might have the same experience of the Oneness with God, how to experience the Oneness with all creation, how to live in Sacred Unity.

Is he the only one who has had this experience? Of course not!  Our books and our libraries are full of others who had such an experience and they were also changed by their new awareness. You may even know one of these people today. They also had or have new eyes to see and ears to hear. Many of them become teachers like Buddha, Lao Tzu, Mohammed, along with others who are alive today.  If you read carefully and get through the hyperbole their beloved followers wrote about them years later, their experiences were very similar and much of their teachings covered many of the same themes.  It all starts with becoming aware of who we really are-part of the divine Oneness. God is not out there but within.

So if there are many, how do we pick our teacher or teachers? We find one that we can relate to based on our own culture, social situation and willingness to commit. We do that naturally whether we realize it or not. But if I am going to try and climb Mount Everest for the first time, I will find someone who has been there, listen to what they have to teach about doing it and then try my best to follow the path they have already forged. But I want to follow someone who I sincerely believe has been there. I want to focus on the teachings, not the teacher. I want to commit to the path, not worship the one who made the path.

How do I know that I have the right teacher? Buddha is recorded as saying: “Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.” Jesus tried to sooth his disciples concerns that they would know if they were on the right path after he was gone: “…you will know by the fruit that it bears.”  In other words we have been given the tools to assess the truth if we are willing to use them.

New Testament scholar, Robert Funk once wrote that if Christianity was going to survive, we would need to “demote Jesus…who has been isolated as the divine son of God, co-eternal with the Father” from his true persona as a wisdom teacher. Although I do not disagree with Funk’s conclusion, I do not see it as a demotion but rather as a freeing. What an incredible thing it would be if we pulled Jesus off the cross as an icon to be worshiped, and let him be free to be the teacher again.

What empowering thing it would be if we actually became disciples of another human being who had experienced the Absolute Oneness of all Creation and then said, “follow me and you too can experience what I experienced.” What would our churches be like if that really happened? Then we might have to take Jesus’ egalitarian teachings on compassion, non-judgment, forgiveness, unity, love, and the “God-within,” seriously.

Maybe that is the problem.

Fred Plumer

Recovering Christians

Engaging the Recovering Christians

By Fred Plumer

It was sometime in 1987, I think, when I got a very strange phone call. I actually thought it was a prank. At the time, I was a very progressive Christian pastor in a very conservative area in Southern California. I had been interviewed in the newspaper a few weeks before and had already received a few crank calls and some pretty nasty mail from some outraged conservative Christians. But this young man sounded very sincere. He wanted to know if we would consider hosting a Fundamentalist Anonymous chapter in our church. I had never heard of the national group and figured no one in the church had heard of it either, so I asked if it would be possible for me to meet with him. I wasn't certain how anonymous this had to be. I assured him that whatever we discussed would remain confidential.

The next day, the young engineer who worked at a nearby aerospace office, stopped by the office. He was nervous at first but seemed to relax as he told a little bit of his story. His family had been "missionaries" in the U.S. for a fundamentalist Christian church. His father was a very domineering man who basically disowned his son when he went to a "liberal" university instead of the Bible College supported by their small denomination. The young man had a hard time socially in the university because he did not seem to fit. He had a very difficult time with a "western civilization" class he took his freshman year. His discomfort changed to curiosity, however, with the encouragement of a couple of his friends. He then took every class on religion and philosophy he could fit into his required course work and somewhere along the way he said, "I suddenly felt like I had been lied to all of those years."

For the next ten years he went through periods of anger, distrust of people, "cold sweat" fear and periods when he would go back to the church of his youth and end up feeling terrible. And then he was introduced to an FA chapter where he lived in the Midwest and found it very helpful. When he took a job in Orange County, CA he began to have anxiety attacks and realized he still needed a support group. That was when he agreed to help start a FA chapter at the UCC church where I was the pastor.

The group only stayed there for a few months. He explained that too many of the potential participants were uncomfortable meeting in a church, even our ultra liberal one that had been the target of the conservative Christians since its founding. I was sorry they did not stay. I would have liked to have stayed in touch with this young man. It was the first time that I knowingly came across the terrible pain and damage that ultra-conservative religion can cause in individuals. It would not be the last.

For the next two decades I counseled uncountable numbers of people who shared their stories of psychological, emotional and even physical abuse in the name of religion. These folks of all ages shared stories of growing up believing that they were impure, were incapable, were worthless, were dirty, and sinful. It was only through their clinging to the belief that through the sacrifice of Jesus, they could avoid more suffering both here and in the hereafter. Sadly the vast majority of people who shared their stories were either women or gay men.

Anitra L. Freeman has published a paper on fundamentalism and writes about traits that fundamentalists use to maintain psychological control over members.

• They insist on a rigid hierarchy of authority. The more extreme the group, the more authority is concentrated in one central figure.
• The group, and the authority figure(s) within the group, withhold or bestow love to control behavior. Misbehaving members are cut off from communication.
• They magnify current social and individual evils and dwell on the "innate wickedness of man."
• Sexual "immorality" is often their central cause.
• They promote a Truth which is superior to all other truths because it is absolute and unchanging.
• They promote distrust of one's personal judgment, being subject instead to the given truths of the group, the judgment of the church as a body, or the proclamations of a central authority figure.
• They are apocalyptic, foretelling an imminent and horrifying future which only the faithful will survive. Any disaster in the news is magnified as "a sign of the apocalypse." (http://www.anitra.net/activism/fundamentalism/psychology.html)

The emotional and psychic damage that occurs when some one becomes involved in these kinds of communities can be extreme. Reading first person stories of people who have gone through these experiences can be very hard. It is clear that the damage is often deep and great and frequently the damaged person has no place to go. There are no rehab centers for recovering fundamentalists.

Over the last three years I have received somewhere between three to eight books a month from publishers that want us to write positive reviews to help market their books. I have been surprised by the number of these books that have been written by people who have gone or are going through a difficult transition from an ultraconservative upbringing to a more open understanding of their religion or an outright rejection of it. They write about the challenges of discovering what they thought was the infallible truth that is no longer true for them. Often they believe that they are "progressive" because they no longer believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, but they retain some very orthodox beliefs. Others reject religion all together.  Some are angry and some are not. It appears that the level of rejection and anger has more to do with how long and at what stage they had held their religious convictions before something changed their perspective.

In the late 1980s and early 90s, mainline church growth experts were suggesting that the growing ultra conservative, mega church phenomenon might be a good thing for the dying mainline churches. They assumed that these new Christians that were flocking to the mega churches would matured in their faith, using James Fowler's hierarchy of "Stages of Faith." As some point they would ultimately become disenchanted with their religious perspective, would leave the mega church and find a local main-line church to continue growing in their stages of faith. The hope was that this would result in a natural growth in our older churches. This has not proven to be the case.

Yes, mega churches tend to have big back doors and suffer even greater losses, on a percentage basis, than most of our mainline churches in our transient society. However, studies have found that only a small percentage of these ex-mega-church-Christians show up in our mainline churches. The vast majority simply stop going to church. They often become part of that growing segment of our society that self-identifies as "spiritual but not religious," now one of the fastest growing groups in our country. Some researchers are wondering if progressive Christianity is going to be skipped by others who now identify as "spiritual but not religious." Philosopher Ken Wilbur and Father Keating have a discussion on this topic in their new DVD which can be ordered through the TCPC website.

So how do we progressive Christians share our perspective so recovering Christians can hear us and actually get excited about the progressive path of Jesus and what our churches have to offer?

The first thing we will have to do is learn how to create more joyful, interactive, and spiritual Sunday celebrations. It will mean making changes that many long term church members will not want to make. But ultimately, we have to ask ourselves how long can we hang on to the past. We have a lot to learn from these conservative churches about telling our story and for the most part we are not getting it. We have to discover and implement more effective ways to communicate the progressive message in different ways and through different media that fit our contemporary society, particularly if we want to attract young adults.

We will also have to learn to share our powerful message with more clarity and substance. Do we really believe that following the teachings of Jesus will really change a life? Has it changed yours? Can we explain why our progressive faith has so compelling and important to us that we think it could be for someone else? Until we know what we represent, we represent nothing.

Are we willing to be patient with recovering Christians who are still struggling with guilt and holding on to beliefs that you may feel are archaic? This is where unconditional love and compassion must enter into our practice. Are we more concerned about winning a debate than we are about sharing our positive story? Can we build up someone who does not think like we think or believe what we believe?

Are we willing to take the time to educate ourselves about our faith so that when we are asked to have a conversation, we actually know what we are talking about? In other words, do we always have to say, "You need to talk to my pastor."

We are sharing a message of love with people who have been taught a message of fear. We are trying to communicate about a great mystery with people who believed only in absolutes and dogmas. We are telling a story of inclusion to people who have been taught only about righteous exclusion. We are trying to demonstrate boundary-less life to some who have believed in the security of separation. We do not have an easy task. But there are a whole lot of searching people these days, who may be ready to let go of the life raft they have been hanging on to for a long time but are uncertain about where they can go. It would be nice if we could at least provide a search light that might illuminate another way for them to navigate "the sea of infinite mystery." *

*Karl Rahmer