Nonconformist Chronicles

I Love My Boy

I write this on the birthday of our firstborn, Justin. I sound like a parent when I say that I can't believe he is already eleven. As you can see from the pictures, his birthday cakes have evolved a bit since birthday number one. He has graduated from Big Bird on his first birthday to Indiana Jones in the present.    

Our kids' birthdays always bring back memories of the days they were born. After Justin had been born at 5:30 in the morning, I did what I always do when a major life transition occurs. I went for a walk in the woods. I drove to a forest preserve in the outskirts of the city and walked as I thanked God for this child. I thought about the compliment the Lord had paid me, to entrust me with the raising of a boy. God entrusted me with the responsibility of teaching---showing---a boy how to become a man. Was I up to the task? 

I'm currently reading John Eldredge's book The Way of the Wild Heart. The book is full of perspective on raising boys to become men. Eldredge describes the phases of a male's life in terms of boyhood, cowboy, warrior, lover, king, and sage. I pray I can adequately see Justin through each of the first five phases. Anyway, the book is excellent if you've been a boy or if you're raising boys. 

I am so thankful to have my boy (and my girl). When Justin was about two I was putting him to bed one night when I said, "I love my boy." He threw his arms around my neck and replied, "I love my boy too!" We have repeated this bedtime ritual often through the years. It has always been spontaneous and unprompted.

I love having my girl who adores her daddy (and whom I adore). And I love having my boy to do the "guy stuff" with. I got him the Transformers movie for his birthday--machines, robots, vehicles, explosions. Sounds great! My wife Gretchen has informed us that we can watch it without her. Right now we're working on her to let me take Justin to see Ironman. Maybe not the best parental decision on my part, but we guys love that stuff! It's got to beat What Women Want or How to Lose a Guy in Ten Days.

Justin has always had a heart for the underdog, the minority, the new kid at school, younger kids, and the "special" child (sounds a bit Christ-like to me). Justin is very talented with "hands-on" stuff (unlike his dad). He loves basketball and is a good sport win or lose (although he did make the winning shot the last game of the season). He is a Boy Scout, a first year trumpet player, and my hiking buddy. And we both share a love for Batman. I love my boy.

            

What Good is Anxiety?

My bank recently charged me a $5.00 dormant account fee. I have this account that I've done nothing with for at least six months. I'm glad my blog service doesn't charge me a dormant account fee since I haven't posted anything here for well over a month. I keep recommitting to this blog, but then life gets crazy again and I start neglecting it.

Some major life transitions over the last few months have kept me sidetracked as I've worked to reacclimate my entire life. I've had a case of writer's block the last several weeks as I deal with some potentially anxiety-producing issues. But the good news is that I don't feel that much anxiety. Sure, I have my moments. But overall I'm doing pretty well. I'd like to believe that it's at least in part due to spiritual growth.

The longer I walk with God, and the more I go through, the more I ask, "What good is anxiety?" I'm sure you've had life experiences in which you felt that the rug had been pulled out from under you. It seemed as if everything came crashing down. I've had my share of sleepless nights through the years. In times past, even in recent weeks, anxiety has made me physically ill.

When past experiences have thrown my life into chaos, I've felt like one of the psalmists, crying out to God in lament, asking "Why?" or "How long?" I have grovelled before God with my face to the ground begging for change or relief. It can be both biblical and healthy to live through experiences that force you to wrestle with God. If you've ever shaken your fist at heaven, it doesn't mean you're a bad person. You're in good company with the psalmists and prophets as you process your faith.

There may again be a time that I find myself desperate and on my face before God. But right now I'm trusting in his faithfulness. That doesn't mean I'm assured of outcomes that I would have ordered. But I trust God in spite of outcomes. Faith simply cannot depend on how well we perceive our lives to be going.

I know that the presence of God is with me regardless of my circumstances. And I know that in his wisdom, he will work all things for good. So what good is anxiety? Paul said, "Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus" (Philippians 4:6-7).

Scripture is clear that anxiety is only overcome by faith. This means trusting in God's faithfulness. I think spiritual growth means finally getting to the place where joy is found in the very presence of God and is not dependant on circumstances. Then we can say with Paul, "I have learned to be content, whatever the circumstances" (Philippians 4:11).      

The Changing Values of the Church # 8

The Value of Preaching, Part Two

I do appreciate the comments on my previous post and I regret that I have not been able to respond. Perhaps I'll integrate some responses into this and other posts.

I'll again say that my concern is not sermon length per se. My concern is a low view of preaching and a general intolerance for the exposition of the Word. This seeming intolerance may be reflected in today's increasing demand for shorter sermons.

I don't think the issue has anything to do with attention spans. We live in an increasingly educated society where a greater number than ever are continuing their education. This means sitting through hours of lectures for a number of years. People can do it if they're convinced that it will improve their lives.

I'm always bothered by the sentiment that it doesn't matter how a minister preaches as long as he's good with people. While I agree that a preacher should work hard to build relationships, he also needs to be a good preacher. So why might some have a low view of preaching? 

1) In our church culture, I think worship is increasingly viewed as being participatory. This is a good corrective to some extremes. Worship is not about being a passive observer. But I think some worship leaders are now accentuating the areas they feel are most participatory (i.e., singing and communion), possibly to the neglect of more Word-oriented activities. Some fail to realize that active listening is also participatory.

2) Some may have a low view of preaching because they've mostly been exposed to mediocre preaching. They haven't heard real biblical exposition that makes Scripture accessible and that connects with everyday life. They've heard soap boxes, rants, doctrinal lectures, denominational defenses, history lessons, and stand-up routines.

Now I don't claim to be the best preacher on earth and no one consistently bats a thousand. But I'm passionate about preaching and forever working toward the goal of perfecting the craft. I've come a long way, but I'm not where I eventually envision myself to be. I work as hard as I do because I see myself as a steward of God's treasure. I view preaching as a sacred trust, not to be handled flippantly or haphazardly.

3) Many are of the view that since preaching isn't what draws people to a church, or keeps them there, then it must not be too important. But who says that preaching makes no difference in drawing or keeping people? Many are starving for the Word.

I'll admit that I've been a member at churches where the preaching had nothing to do with why I was there. I was there because of relationships with the people, or because I felt needed, or because the worship was inspiring. So I admit that preaching isn't the whole package. But there have been at least two churches I've attended because I was drawn by the preaching. The sermons spoke to me so personally that I wondered if the preacher had access to my life on hidden camera. The sermon was the shot in the arm I needed each week. Preaching was not the only reason I stayed, but it was the reason I came.

And we must remember that people are wired differently. While we all need preaching, communion, and to sing songs of praise, there are different aspects of worship that speak to different people according to who they are and where they are. While the preaching is what's always done it for me, I'm not the only one in the congregation. And while preaching may not be what does it for you, it may be what keeps someone else encouraged.                     

The Changing Values of the Church # 7

The Value of Preaching

A few months ago my friend, Frank Bellizzi, did a few posts on his blog in regard to a gospel meeting conducted by Evangelist T. B. Larrimore in Sherman, Texas in 1894. (Frank's posts can be found here, and here, and here). For five months, Larrimore would speak every day, twice a day, and three times on Sunday. Over 250 people were baptized at this meeting.

One Brother Earnest Hildebrand, a member at Sherman, wrote to Gospel Advocate about the meeting reporting that "Still, nobody seems tired, and no one seems willing to entertain the thought of closing the meeting...There has never been the slightest inclination of even a probable decline in interest, or in the mental, physical, or heart-power of any one engaged or interested in the work."

Larrimore later wrote to Gospel Advocate editor David Lipscomb, stating that the average length of sermons for this meeting was fifty minutes and the entire service lasted around seventy minutes. Lipscomb states his reason for reporting this meeting as the basis of an appeal to preachers and churches everywhere to do more preaching.

My purpose here is not to simply rehash what Frank has already said well enough. But since his posts, I've thought about this a lot and I've re-read those posts often. What strikes me is how far we've come in our church culture over the last century.

Now this isn't a total lament. I'm not advocating a return to fifty minute sermons. Absolutely not! But am I amiss to sense yet another swinging of the pendulum in our church culture? Not only did the church once seem to place a higher premium on the assembly and on Scripture, but it seems that we once had a higher view of preaching.   

During my recent job search, I contacted one church whose leadership demanded that sermons be kept to about fifteen minutes. I told them I would be hard pressed to do that. I had my rejection letter within the week. Now just for the record, I try to keep my sermons to about twenty minutes. I sometimes go into twenty five minutes, but rarely thirty. It took years to learn how to say something worthwhile in twenty minutes.   

The point of this post is not sermon length. But what I'm out to demonstrate is the low view that so many have of preaching these days. Some in a movement that once tolerated fifty minute sermons are now demanding that preaching be kept to fifteen minutes. In time, I wonder if sermons will be held to ten minutes or if some of our churches will dispense with preaching in worship altogether.

I've no doubt that Larrimore's meeting was successful in his time because it was a different time. In an era before the gradual shift from modernism to post-modernism began, rational argument and logical deduction were very persuasive. Now we're told that we preach to a sound bite generation who are accustomed to commerical breaks, audio-visual technology, and emotional appeal. We're told that we must connect with the culture, be more interactive, appeal to more senses than just the sense of hearing. We must persuade the heart and not just the head.

I agree to an extent, but my concern is that we might have underestimated the power of the spoken Word. The timeless Scriptures seem to maintain a very high view of preaching.

• While the world considers the preaching of the cross to be foolishness, the saved know that it is the power of God (1 Cor. 1:23-25).
• Faith comes by hearing the Word of God (Rom. 10:17).
• The Word, like the rain, always accomplishes its purpose and does not return to God void (Isa. 55:10-11).

So just how much do we accomodate our preaching to a supposedly post-modern culture that doesn't seem as persuaded by logic and explanation? Where is the line between accomodating the message and dumbing it down?  Where is the line between accomodation and entertainment?

Have we lost confidence in the power of God's Word to do its work? Might we have insulted the masses by judging them too shallow to handle biblical exposition? What do you think?      

The Changing Values of the Church, # 6

The Value of the Word, Part Two

• We do Bible things in Bible ways and call Bible things by Bible names.
• We speak where the Bible speaks and remain silent where the Bible is silent.
• The Bible is our only authority in religious matters.
• We have no book but the Bible.
• Let's go back to the Bible.

The above points are slogans, or variations of such, that grew out of the Restoration Movement. There is no doubt that churches of that movement have held the Bible in high esteem. We've sang songs like "Give me the Bible." Instead of "church camp" we've had "Bible camp." We've competed in Bible bowls. When confronted with a new idea we've demanded book, chapter, and verse as proof.

You would think that people with such a high regard for the Bible would be the most loving, united, and Spirit-filled people on the planet. But has that been the prevailing reputation among those of the Restoration heritage (or of those affiliated with the most conservative stream of that movement known as churches of Christ)? We've too often been labeled as argumentative, sectarian, or legalistic. And too often, the labels have fit.

The problem has been adequately diagnosed as "bibliolatry." While holding a book in high esteem, some have failed to discern the spirit within the text. The text is a means to an end that the influence and application of that text might form Christ in us. When religion becomes all about a book, it can cease to be about a person.

When this happens, knowing the "right answers" displaces a relationship with Jesus as the litmus test for identifying faithfulness. We can become more concerned with being right than with being righteous. We can become more concerned with memorization than with transformation. We can become more concerned with knowing facts than with living faith.

At first glance, it would seem that previous generations were more interested in the Scripture. They came to hear it taught and preached whenever the church doors were opened. One to two week Gospel Meetings were well enough attended to justify one every Spring and another every Fall.

I have no doubt that many of those previous generations were faithful and sincere. But for others the motives were less sincere and more legalistic. Some of that attitude still exists. In more conservative congregations members still speak the rhetoric which insists that they hold the Bible in high esteem. But while some have the rhetoric down, it is evident that they've not been transformed. Haven't we all known people who defend dogma while defaming their brothers?

I've been concerned about the church. My previous posts have lamented the lackadaisical attitude that many of this generation have toward worship attendance. They don't even come to class, much less anything extra. Any excuse to miss will do. What that says to me is that people lack the passion they should have for studying the Word, being among the family of God, or praising the Lord. It's easy to underestimate the power of the assembly to transform if you're in a dead church. But let's not let our experience get in the way of biblical theology. The assembly has a very significant role in the lives of believers.

Please don't hear my concern as some legalistic argument that equates the assembly as the end-all litmus test of faithfulness, on par with loving your neighbor as yourself. That is not my point. Nor am I saying that it's always a sin to "miss church." As a new Christian, my job forced me to miss every Sunday morning.

But what concerns me is that the pendulum seems to have swung from viewing the assembly as important (perhaps too important) to hearing my generation routinely dis the assembly: "Going to church is not Christianity;" "We don't go to church. We are the church." These seem to be the slogans of this new generation. But are we throwing the baby out with the bath water?

By comparing this generation to previous ones, I am not calling us back to some golden era in which everyone had it together. I even suspect that in a movement typified by legalistic sectarianism our motives weren't always that pure (with notable exceptions acknowledged). Did previous generations go to church all the time because they were serious about transformation or because they were afraid not to go? I think quite a few were more concerned with punching their ticket than with loving their neighbor. We did have a mandate, after all, to study to show ourselves approved. If we didn't study, we must not be approved.

But in spite of all that study and church-going we still had the reputation of sectarian judgmentalism. How did that happen? Just holding the Bible in high esteem did not make us biblical. I'll close with this quote from Eugene Peterson's Eat This Book:

Once the Bible became a reverend authority it became possible to treat it as a thing, an impersonal authority, to use it to define or damn others, and to avoid dealing with God's Word in a personal, relational, and obedient way. It didn't take long for people to start using the Bible as a cover, as a front, by honoring it, praising it as a verbal artifact, defending it as the truth against all comers...But the words of Scripture are not primarily words, however impressive, that label or define or prove, but words that mean, that reveal, that shape the soul...

Having and defending and celebrating the Bible instead of receiving, submitting to, and praying the Bible, masks an enormous amount of non-reading.

Sound like anybody we know?            

WinterJam 2008: Why I'm Becoming a Skillet Fan

Last Friday night we attended Winter Jam 2008, an annual Christian music tour featuring a variety of contemporary Christian artists. I initially went because Barlow Girl was going to be there. Having purchased one of their CDs, I was interested to hear how their tunes would come across live. But while there, I also fell in love with the music of Skillet (pictured).

The event was held in the arena on the Ohio State University campus with 10,000 people in attendance. We stood in a long line in twenty degree weather since the event was general admission at the door. We got pretty good seats near the stage in spite of the fact that there was no reserved seating. Here is my short review of each act:

Warm up acts included pureNRG, three acrobatic kids (ages 11, 12, & 14) who sing, dance, and have been featured on Radio Disney. They do back flips, cartwheels, and everything else. My wife commented that this is what happens with too much Mountain Dew and Snickers. There was the soul/rap act, Group 1 Crew. They somehow manage to be melodic and the only female member has one powerful voice. So does Mandisa, the woman who brought Jesus to American Idol and forgave Simon Cowell on national television.

Acoustic, folksy duo, Connersvine, performed a couple of songs. They consist of Chris Wilson and Hunter Smith (Smith plays football for the Indianapolis Colts). They added more variety with beautiful songs and harmonies.

The show was hosted by Newsong. Now here is one impressive group of musicians. Their professionalism stands out on hits like "Blessed be Your Name" and "Defining Moment." These guys are really versatile in terms of musical styles and some members play multiple instruments. One of the more talented groups out there.

The headliner of this tour is usually Mercy Me, but since they couldn't make the Columbus show, Steven Curtis Chapman was filling in. But that's okay with us, since we love Steven Curtis Chapman and this is one way I persuaded Gretchen to go. He's another one who is just a bit louder and harder live than on CD. His songs included "The Great Adventure," "Live Out Loud," Magnificent Obsession," "Cinderella," and "Children of God."    

Of course Barlow Girl (cell phone picture on the right) rocked the place with powerful live renditions of "Grey," "Let Go," "Never Alone," "Average Girl," and a medley of "I Believe in Love" and "I Need You to Love Me." On CD, these three sisters are pretty versatile, with ballads and beautiful vocal harmonies included. But don't see them live unless you want to rock out. I'm almost embarrassed that I still like this kind of music---almost.

In spite of all these great performers, a highlight of my evening was Skillet. These guys were AWESOME! They are a powerhouse of energy, creativity, and sensationalism--with music accompanied by pyrotechnics. You could feel every beat of the drums in every bone of your body. It was loud, hard driving, and over the top. When they were done I asked Gretchen, "So what did you think of Skillet?" She replied, "I feel like I've been hit by one."      

Skillet's musical style is described on the Skillet Wikipedia article as one that "spans the musical genres from grunge, to electro-industrial, nu metal, to alternative rock, and even hints of goth metal influence." Skillet's latest CD, Comatose, respects Skillet's musical roots, while exploring new territory. A review on the Winterjam website describes it like this:

Classic rock riffs, swirling drums, monstrous hooks, and undeniably catchy choruses...hints of old school progressive rock mixed in with modern alternative flourishes...touches of classical influence as swelling strings intersect with sonic adrenaline rushes.

I was a huge rock fan as a youth, but I haven't been impressed with much that's come out over the last twenty years. Part of that could be that since becoming a Christian, the lifestyle reflected in the lyric content no longer speaks to where I'm at or ever want to be again. Rock has also evolved. Gone are the progressive styles of bands like Kansas, ELP, and Styx. Not many guitar legends or guitar dominant music have taken center stage the last two decades. The goth and grunge have, for the most part, been talentless excuses for music with "singing" that sounds more like someone throwing up. Lyrics are often immoral and fatalistic.

Isn't it ironic that it's Christian bands, like Skillet and Barlow Girl, who (IMO) are taking rock back to its roots. Skillet's music has evolved and matured to include a progressive element. There are also shades of grunge, even with lyric content that deals with darker themes. But the difference is that Skillet's lyrics offer hope as opposed to fatalism or apathy. And Skillet has talent. Guitarist Ben Kasica could be the next guitar legend.

There may be hope for rock music yet, but it surprisingly exists in Christian circles. That is where progressive elements, three chord jam, and guitar dominance are being restored. And with lyrics that don't undermine our lifestyle. Too bad that many of the a cappella tradition are so far out of the loop with what's going on. There is something for every musical taste in today's Christian music scene.

Father-Daughter 50's Sock Hop

Last night I had the privilege of escorting my seven-year-old to the Brownies Father-Daughter 50s sock hop. I wasn't crazy about the idea when the flier first came home. I didn't think Erin would be excited about going to a dance. But when she started getting excited, I could not even think of turning her down.

My initial thoughts were, "What if I look silly?; What if I embarrass myself?; What if others dance better than me?" (Yes, I actually thought that). But the point was a night out for fathers and daughters to be together. Erin is a real Daddy's girl and there is no one she would rather be with than me. To have me all to herself for an evening was quite a thrill. How could I say "no" to that?

We prepared for the evening in advance by practicing our moves to 50s music CDs and by watching episodes of "Happy Days" (which Erin now wants to watch on a regular basis). I had the stomach flu last weekend and Erin was praying I'd be well in time for the sock hop.

The night finally came and we arrived at the middle school where the event was held. I have never seen so many leather jackets and poodle skirts in one place. Did EVERYBODY dress that way in the 50s? How would I know? How would any of the dads on the dance floor know? Most, if not all, of the dads in attendance weren't even alive in the 50s, which made the whole thing even funnier.

We arrived at the gym and just observed during the first couple of songs. If I was concerned about my dance moves being unimpressive, watching most of these other dads convinced me that I clearly had nothing to worry about. No one was there to watch me anyway. 

When the professional deejay announced that he would be playing "The Twist," we got out on the floor. That's one we practiced! It's one of the few dances I know (or think I know). I attended a Chubby Checker concert the night he turned forty (which has already been years ago) and he was still twisting.

Well, we did the twist with high energy and vigor. I sat the next one out due to a powerful cramp in my side. Then we got back at it. The easier songs included "Tutti Frutti," "Wild Thing," and the "Hokey Pokey." They left me in the dust during "The Chicken Dance." "Blue Suede Shoes" is really hard to dance to. I only saw one dad attempt the limbo. If I had done the limbo, I would have wound up at the chiropracter. Erin did great the whole time!

We were in line to have our pictures made during "The Macarena" and "YMCA." (No fair! Those aren't 50s songs). After standing in line for a picture we went to the commons area for root beer floats. The girls did crafts--picture frames with pink poodles around the border. I guess we'll put our sock hop picture in it. There were hoola hoops in a corner of the gym for any interested parties.

On the way home, Erin said this was one of the best nights of her life. It's a reminder to me of just how important it is to spend time with each child individually. It's important to spend time with the whole family. But each child needs the attention of each parent individually as well. I'm glad I'll never have to regret the things I could have done with my kids.

An Uncle Again and Blogging Again

Some of you may recall a prayer request I made several months ago. My sister and her husband were expecting their second child, twenty years after the birth of their first one. Their second one was a total surprise after having been told that they would never have children again.

Well, my niece, Emma, was born on December 7, 2007. Her mom turned 40 on the 24th, but this was not on her list of forty things to do before turning forty. In fact, some of those things have been postponed. While little Emma was being born, her sister, Amber, was taking a college final.

So thank you to everyone who prayed. Things went well and Emma is healthy and happy.

On another note, I appreciate all who read this and I apologize for not always responding to comments and for the long hiatuses between some posts over the last six or eight months. I'm still learning the ropes of a new ministry, new place, new everything. We're gaining on the transitional business, but don't quite have it all done yet. And now it's getting to be tax time. ARRGGGH! We also have some personal challenges that have been frustrating, but I'm optimistic.

So from here on I do intend to blog more. Can that be a New Year's resolution or with most people is blogging one of the addictions they want to cut back on? But here are some of my good intentions:

• Post at least once a week, if not more often
• Respond to comments more frequently
• Keep up with my reading of others' blogs and post occasional comments
• Intersperse some lighter and more personal posts with the other stuff

In addition to blogging, I hope to settle back into some other regimens now that the holidays are behind us and we've been in Ohio for six months. My reading has been very sporadic over the past year, so I hope to make it through more books in 2008. I usually try to balance my reading among topics that will help me to grow personally, professionally, and intellectually. I'll share what I'm currently reading in a near future post.

In congregational ministry, my mission for 2008 is to get connected, with the priority being connection with the congregation. Not that I haven't done any of that and I've done more than most of our members could know since no one sees me all the time. But in addition to my reading regimen, I'll be getting back to a visiting regime that kind of fell by the wayside over the holidays. Not many want visits between Thanksgiving and New Years. Since some are so busy, formal visits aren't always possible with everyone. So I'll have to be creative about how to connect with young and busy families.

But for the record, I am very happy to be in my current location. It has not been a disappointment by any means. This is a rare kind of loving and accepting congregation that few ministers (or members) ever manage to find. Gretchen and I were just talking today about what this congregation has to offer:

• When we come away from worship we feel like we've really worshiped enthusiastically as a body.
• We are confident that newcomers to this congregation will be accepted and not needlessly offended.
• We have no doubt that we are loved.

We are blessed.

Do You Know What Your Children Are Reading?

I'll return to my current ongoing series in the near future, but for now I will pause to share something that has been troubling our family. This may be longer than usual, but if you bear with me it may be enlightening. I would value the opinions of some fellow Christians on how you recommend we deal with this.

Our son, Justin, attends a public school where his fifth grade reading class consists of reading groups in which children read book chapters independently and then come together as a group with the teacher to discuss and share their responses. They also provide written responses.

One day Justin came home lamenting that his most recent assignment had a lot of "bad words" in it. My wife, Gretchen, being a responsible parent, chose to investigate. So in one evening she read the book through to discover twelve occurrences of "butthead," two occurrences of "maxi-pad," (used as a name), and at least one occurrence of "turd." The book also described bullies who threatened to "slice and dice" their victims and one instance of murder in which a four-year-old child watches his mother be strangled to death by the boy's father. 

We found it appalling that such literature was being assigned in a public school and that our tax dollars are paying for it. So we requested that Justin be moved to another reading group. Before long he was reading a book called "Travel Team" about a traveling basketball team. Again, he mentioned bad words.

So again, Gretchen investigated. Reading yet another book in one sitting she noted the following occurrences of crude or profane language:

• The names of God and Christ as bywords including the term g--d---
• A reference to "kissing butt"
• two occurrences of the "S" word
• Nine occurrences of the word p--s
• Two occurrences of "ass" (and not in reference to a donkey)
• At least one occurrence of the "B" word.
• One occurrence of "rat's ass"
• The usual "H" and "D" words
• The phrase "stick it up his a--"
• The phrase "Screw em'"

And this is only a partial list.

So naturally we requested that he not finish that book. So he was assigned yet another book called "The Egypt Game" in which a group of elementary school children trespass on a man's property without permission, where they meet to imitate religious Egyptian rituals. They pretend to be priests, fashioning their own idols, making sacrifices, and using a tuna can of "holy water." The book's stated purpose (in so many words) is to discourage judgmentalism and to encourage a tolerance for diversity. The book concludes with a two chapter preview of the author's follow-up in which the kids are reading palms and telling fortunes.

When Gretchen lamented the use of bad words in these books, one of the district's supposed literary "experts" replied that it is "open to interpretation." But Gretchen objected that if it is open to interpretation, then why does page 24 of the school handbook forbid the possession or use of profanity by students on campus? The school obviously has some standard of what they consider profanity and what they do not. They make a distinction between appropriate and inappropriate language. So why are they allowing a double standard in which kids are assigned books with language that they could be expelled for repeating?

The reading teacher claims that since our child reads above his grade level, the content we're complaining about is just unavoidable. And she says that in middle school it's even worse! 

There have been some concessions in reponse to our grievances. It is claimed that a couple of books have been pulled from the book room due to our complaints. Gretchen has also been told that she has the right to read and approve any future books before they are assigned to our child. He has even been given the option to do independent study.

Gretchen toured the book room and was asked for her opinion on another book called "My Brother Sam is Dead." Multiple copies are in the reading room, so Gretchen borrowed one and read it (It has not, to my knowledge, been assigned).

The book is historical fiction, set in the Revolutionary War era. There are multiple depictions of graphic violence including decapitation, bayoneting, and a detailed description of execution by firing squad at close range. Religious people are portrayed as hypocrites. Offensive language includes the following:

• The names of God and Jesus as bywords, including occurrences of g--d---
• "Bastard" is used twice.
• S.O.B is used once (and not the initials)
• Someone is told to go to hell

We have inquired about the school's criteria for choosing age-appropriate books. They depend largely on a website called "commonsensemedia.org". This website recommends "My Brother Sam is Dead" for eleven-years-old and up. We disagree. Any book that would be rated R or PG-13 if it were a movie, is not appropriate for eleven-year-olds.

Gretchen argued that impressionable children might be influenced by these books to repeat language, imitate acts of violence, or be troubled by the subject matter. She was told "You know your child" as if the extent of the problem is our immature or overly scrupulous child.

This isn't just about our child! That is far from the extent of the issue. This is about our society. Why should we, as tax payers, not be able to trust our public schools to not assign profanity and R rated subject matter to our children? This is a problem our parents and grandparents did not have to worry about. When we were kids we read Beverly Cleary, E. B. White, and Laura Ingalls Wilder. Where have all the decent authors gone? Is it really true that all literature for young readers has become off color or offensive? If the new stuff is all so bad, why can't we just assign the old stuff?

Moreover, my wife should not have to preview everything her son reads in public school. We have been told that she has that right and that our son could even do independent study. The problem with that is that we already work hard to pay our taxes. If we had time to home school we would not have enrolled in public school. As tax payers our interests should be considered.

And furthermore, as tax payers, our child should not be exposed to literature that violates our value system. Our child should not be assigned literature that defames or profanes the name of the God we worship. This is an offense to us. And yes, I know, any selection will offend someone. But there are some lines that no one is supposed to cross. Had these reading assignments profaned the name of Allah, this would have been considered inappropriate. If any minority were portrayed as stereotypically as Christians, this would have been considered inappropriate. But Christians are fair game as the only group of people that it's okay to offend. Double standard.

This isn't an attempt to impose our values or religion on others. The problem is that others' values are being forced upon our children. The stated purpose of "My Brother Sam is Dead" is to ask, "Could the U. S. have made its way without all the agony and killing?" The question, in other words, is to ask whether the Revolutionary War was even necessary. The book will certainly make you think twice before supporting any war effort. It's point is well taken. But it isn't much of a leap to interpret this as anti-war propaganda. Now we're even questioning the Revolution, which some would consider a challenge to patriotism itself.

I have no problem with an objective approach to the war issue, but do our kids get both sides? Do they also hear from conservative authors who applaud the veterans and who consider the Revolution to have been necessary to grant the freedoms the liberals claim to hold so dear?

And why can a book describing pagan worship be assigned in the name of tolerance and diversity? If the kids in that book had been playing church and observing the Christian sacraments, I'd guess that book would not be in the book room. Judeo-Christian beliefs and practices are the one thing we cannot tolerate. I'm not saying we should teach religion in the schools. I'm saying that if we're truly going to claim religious neutrality, then let's not use pagan or ancient religions to make a point about tolerance. Let's give everyone equal time or no time at all.

It seems that today's literature for young readers is one sided. It leans heavily toward irreligion, crudity, and liberalism. How are these books selected? Well, I mentioned the common sense media site, but the district also depends on recommendations in publishers' reviews. I noticed that some of the books in question are highly recommended by the New York Times and the American Library Association (ALA)--two of the most liberal institutions on the planet. I certainly don't want those guys influencing American children's reading assignments.

In case you haven't figured it out, there is an agenda at work here. Specific public schools may either be willing participants or clueless. But the agenda is to propagandize America's youth with the liberal agenda--to raise up an entire generation who shares their values.

This became very clear as I explored the ALA's website. One of their big causes is their ongoing campaign against censorship of any kind. They complain that each year books are pulled from school libraries because of parental complaints. They keep an ongoing list of most challenged books each year. They consider it a victory when they can partner with so-called civil liberties groups in blocking the pulling of these books. They argue that our young people deserve the right to make up their own minds about things.

And that is exactly my point. But how can young people make up their minds if they are only exposed to the liberal side? See, the liberals have their own brand of censorship. I doubt that many of them would approve of "Little Black Sambo" or "Uncle Remus" in the school library. But hey, if we're going to be consistent, anything goes! The ALA hates censorship, but they aren't above trying to censor parents and conservative tax payers.      

What I'm arguing is not censorship in the true sense. I'm not saying we prevent what can be written, or published, or that we burn the books in question. I'm saying that at the very least these books should have ratings just like the Hollywood movies. And of course the ALA is fighting that with everything they've got, arguing that it prejudices readers against certain materials. My point is that it could protect children from what I consider inappropriate.

At the very least I think schools could do a better job screening. If the commonsense website is their filter of choice, they should look at the summary of the book's content and not just the recommended age level. Anything with profanity, sexuality, or graphic violence should not be considered in a public school--at least not in elementary school or middle school.

What I would like to know is this: Do most parents know what their kids are reading? And do they care? Why have I been so out-of-the-loop on this? Why have I never heard about the kind of stuff they're assigning in elementary or middle schools?

Why has there not been more of a public outcry? Hasn't anybody made this their cause? I know that evangelicals have battled homosexual marriage, abortion, and pornography. They have provided online movie reviews for Christians. But are any Christian groups watchdogging children's literature? Who are the experts? And if one cares to fight this politically, who do they call for help?

And the last question. Should we even bother to fight it or just throw up our hands and conclude that change is not possible? How much good has Dobson's war on pornography really accomplished?

I've never been much of an activist and have always been fairly apolitical. And yet I feel some responsibility as an American tax payer, in a government by the people, to make my voice heard and at least get the word out. But where does one begin and is it worth it? Is it naive to expect sweeping reform? But if we can just influence one school board member, one principal, or one superintendent, or inform one parent, is it worth it? Have we made a difference? Or should we simply retreat to the private schools and let the liberals run things unchallenged?

What do some of you Christians think?      

The Changing Values of the Church # 5

The Value of the Word, Part One

It's mind-boggling to consider the amount of money some people will spend, the lines in which they will stand, and the inconvenience they will endure, all in the name of sports. This year I attended my first Ohio State football game. As we approached the stadium, fans weren't hard to spot because so many were wearing team colors. Many were having tail gate parties, some of which began as early as five in the morning. Outside the stadium some without tickets were in tents, with generators set up to power their TVs and satellite dishes on tripods. It reminded me of worshipers gathered in the Court of the Gentiles because they couldn't get into the inner courts of the temple.

Hold on a minute! Did I say worshipers? Is sports a religion? With some, yes. One's God, or idol, is whatever one makes a priority. It's been said that the easiest way to identify your object of worship is to examine your check book register and your day planner. Wherever your discretionary time and money goes, that is your religion. Now I'm not saying all sports fans are idolaters or that there is anything wrong with being a sports fan. But some are excessive.

There aren't too many revivals, gosepl meetings, or seminars on Scripture anymore. Some churches have canceled Sunday and/or Wednesday night meetings because the people just won't come out.

• Some could not possibly make it through a weekly one hour Bible class, but they're parked in front of the TV three hours straight to watch football.
• Some are unable to locate key Scriptures, but they can cite sports statistics .
• Some are simply too busy to volunteer for church programs, but they can make tremendous sacrifice for their kids' sports programs.
• Some make contributions to the church that by no means reflect their prosperity, but they can somehow afford to be season ticket holders.
• Some will endure all kinds of weather to watch sports, but they won't drive to church in a snow flurry.
• Some will unashamedly walk out in the middle of a worship assembly to attend a sporting event, but how many will leave before a game is over to attend a church event?
• Some would never travel for a church retreat and would never dream of using vacation time to attend a lectureship or worship conference, but they will travel for sporting events and tournaments.

Each year parents shell out hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars to keep their kids in sports. It's common for folks to make an early exit from the assembly due to sports commitments. It's common for folks to miss an entire season of Sunday worship while a sports season is going on.

Now sports season isn't all that people get excited about. I saw people literally camped out on the sidewalk of Target when Playstation 3 came out. People lined up in bookstores at midnight for the Harry Potter books. On the day after Thanksgiving, the first official shopping day of the Christmas season, people were out at four in the morning standing in lines 150 yards long.

• But who would stand in line to hear the Word of God preached?
• Who would adjust their personal budget to generously support those who preach the gospel?
• Who, these days, would tolerate a sermon that runs the length of their favorite sitcom?
• Who would sit outside enduring the elements (as they do at ballgames) to hear a sermon?
• Who would travel to hear Scripture taught?

Paul charged Timothy with preaching the Word. He told him to be prepared in season and out of season (2 Timothy 4:2). As I write this it is football season, deer season, and the holiday season. But in our current church climate, is Scripture in season or out of season?