Why I Swear

I swear.

I know that’s not so cool with some folks. Some might not like it because it’s not "proper." Others find themselves in a generation where it just wasn’t (and still isn’t) ok. Others think there’s something prohibiting it in the Ten Commandments (wrong). Then there are those who are horrified by the thought that a pastor would say such things (well, here I am…oops?!).

So why do I swear? I think I swear because I don’t have tattoos. I think I swear because I don’t have piercings or wear bikinis. I think I swear to express myself. You know, to be me. I’m not into that other stuff; but for some reason I’m into swearing.

You could say that it’s to separate myself from the crowd—not in a sense that I have to prove something—but as a way to distinguish myself. It could also be my sorry attempt at pushing the envelope, trying to be edgy.

I guess I’m not even that cool to try to be cool. My mouth just flies sometimes and unless in inappropriate settings, I haven’t seen the need to control it. It’s my way to be real. Oh, yeah. And I’m human.

About three years ago I was leading a camping weekend out at one of our United Methodist camps. A new member of the church sat down with me on the dock and the two of us had a great, deep conversation about church, pastors, denominations and all the "stuff" that we’ve seen or put up with over the years. It only seemed natural to come up with some four-lettered words describing how pastors or priests have abused, churches have failed, and denominations don’t get it.

This new member halted our conversation. "Did you just say what I think you said?" he asked. Feeling pretty comfortable from our talk and the vibes I got from the guy, I said "Yeah…!" and shared with him my thoughts about getting real and being real as a person and Christian (expressions, thoughts, language and all!)—and yes, even as clergy.

"A pastor that swears--- that is so refreshing!" he said. Then he demonstrated his own command on the language with some new vocabulary and we continued our talk without holding back or feeling constricted.

So let’s be clear. I don’t swear around little kids or grandmas or drop the F-bomb in worship. But I do believe in being real, expressing myself in appropriate times and places in a way that people can relate to and in a way they’d even use themselves. I believe that we get too caught up in the little stuff (ever noticed how short those words are?) and lose sight of the big stuff. Like Jesus. Like God. And like being faithful. Those are the things that I’ll do my best not to disrespect.

In thinking about this blog, I wrote a former professor of mine from seminary, Bruce Birch—he’s the Dean at Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington, DC. He was the one who taught us that "Do not take thy Lord’s name in vain" had nothing to do about swearing (which as a 23 year-old who liked to swear thought was the coolest thing she’d ever learned in higher ed).

Below you can see his response to my question about "fowl language." I made a little mistake with spelling—should have been "foul" language… Anyway—you’ll enjoy his response—he’s the best and funniest teacher I ever had (even at times when it’s at my own expense…!).

The Ten Commandments and Language
The Ten Commandments given to Moses lay down important guidelines for our lives that are still relevant today. Of course, the difference between ancient times and our own means that some translation and interpretation is necessary. A good example of this is the third commandment "You shall not take the Lord's name in vain." Traditionally this has been taken to be a commandment to forbid swearing. Thus, it would be a commandment opposed to "foul" language. Considerable confusion has been cast over the matter, however, by the recent article published by Prof. Sidney A. Dumbcluck. He reminded readers of the overwhelmingly rural background of the Old Testament and proposed that this commandment was really intended to prohibit "fowl" language. The chicken, as were many other animals, was revered by the Canaanites. Of course, the "fowl" image of such birds was forbidden as an object of worship. This makes the third commandment a direct outgrowth of the second commandment forbidding idolatry. It should be read "You shall not use the Lord's name in a "vane," referring to the use of the rooster image in eathervanes. Such association of the Lord's name with a "fowl" image is strictly forbidden. Now as clever as Prof. Dumbcluck's hypothesis seems, it is entirely wrongheaded and incorrect. The commandment does indeed have to do with "foul" language rather than "fowl" language, but both Prof. Dumbcluck and the traditional interpreters have missed an important hermeneutical clue. The entire Bible begins with a reference to baseball--"In the big inning..." Gen. 1:1a. Thus, the commandment has to do with our response when life gives us a sweet pitch right down the center of the plate and the best we can do is "foul" it off. We miss our chance at hitting the home run grooved for us by God and hoped for by all those family members and parishioners rooting for our leadership at the plate. Of course, this often leads to "foul" language of the coarser variety so swearing and "fouled" pitches are indeed, at times, related. The Decalogue ("log" here may refer to a baseball bat, thus, "ten bats"--God's grace is more generous than the three strikes usually allowed) is still clearly relevant to our modern lives as we attempt to follow God's will for our lives. There is no need for "foul" language when we "foul" the opportunities given to us by God. Our efforts need not be in "vain" if we stand in and boldly take our swings, assuming that we resist the temptation to chicken out.
Have a great
day!
Bruce

Idiocy

I went on vacation. I’m back and I’m feeling particularly spunky.

So what am I feel spunky about?

How about Pope Benedict declaring all Protestant churches “defective” because somehow (he believes) we don’t fall in the line of apostolic succession? (If you don’t even know what apostolic succession is, that’s ok, cuz basically the rest of this blog is not about weighty doctrinal language but about poking fun at idiocy).

Articles and blogs have had Protestant leaders getting their underwear in a bunchy about the Pope calling us defective. Well, what’s so wrong with that?! We ARE defective! The point that my comrades missed about the idiocy of the Pope’s statement is that he fails to see how the Catholic Church is defective TOO! We are ALL defective.

It’s not that one church has it “right” and the other/s don’t. NEITHER of us, NONE of us do! You know that line in the Lord’s Prayer that goes “YOUR kingdom come, YOUR will be done…” No Christian or church has completely figured it out yet. That’s why when we talk about Christ’s second coming—it’s not here yet! Cuz if WE’RE to be the BODY of Christ, it’s not until we act fully as he would have us do that the kingdom will come! Jesus isn’t going to skateboard down on some cloud and zap everyone into good behavior someday. It’s up to us, his followers—who are fallible, often unknowing people—to try to live by God’s grace to be Christ’s body on this earth—to make the world, the “kingdom,” as God and Jesus would have it to be.

In sum,… I would have liked to have said (and thought) that we were a little closer to the kingdom coming before the Pope’s latest snafu. But looking at world-wide church leadership and its complete lack of self-awareness… Hmm… guess two thousand years since Jesus lived isn’t long enough for us to have figured it out. I’ll be optimistic: give us another thousand.

What Evangelism IS

So I beat one of my parishioners with a Bible in worship yesterday. OK, yes, he knew it was coming and he agreed to it.

In my sermon I was talking about what evangelism is, and what evangelism is not. Yeah—the Bible thumping, Bible beating was a demonstration of what evangelism is NOT.

As mainline Protestants we’ve let too many fundamentalists and so-called “evangelicals” run away with this word and its true Greek meaning: good news. They’ve stolen our good news and tried to beat people up—maybe not physically—but certainly verbally and theologically with the Bible. Especially our GBLT brothers and sisters.

The Gospel of John, chapter 4:7-30 tells the story of Jesus encountering the Samaritan woman at the well. Sharing the good news with her wasn’t an attack by Jesus-- beating her up with the latest papyrus copy of the Hebrew Scriptures. Instead of a one-time verbal attack or domination of dialogue, Jesus takes a five-step approach to sharing the good news he has for her life. He INITIATES contact with the woman by meeting her at the well (a place where he was crossing cultural, linguistic, and sexual boundaries by talking with her). He engages in CONVERSATION with her (the text is great here—this is one of the handful of times that the gospels are really drawn-out in their dialogue). They both share in REFLECTION of the thoughts and opinions of the other (what a refreshing way for us to consider talking to someone about our faith lives?!). The Samaritan woman is RE-DIRECTED, physically (heads back to the city) and spiritually, after her encounter with Jesus. The woman is REJUVENATED—she’s given new energy and new life by learning about the “living water” and she runs back to tell others. Those who listen to her are so excited about what they’ve heard, they then leave the city and turn to find Jesus for themselves.

Conclusion?

What evangelism IS according to Jesus:

Purposeful initiation of contact, engagement in conversation, dialogue that encourages thoughtful reflection, redirection of life after a mystical encounter, and living and sharing a rejuvenated life because of the experience.

Blog #2

So I think I could really get into this blogging thing. Especially the stream of consciousness, “unfiltered” nature to it all.

This blogging stuff is basically what I always wanted to say in seminary (and often did, with my friends) but had no one “out there” to hear it or read it. Lucky you! I always thought that some sort of Thursday night TV drama would have loved to get a script out of the thoughts (and actions) of those dorm room hours…Yeah, THEY’RE the ones offering moral leadership in our churches now…:0!

But I digress. The point here is that I think there’s a whole new generation of excited young, faithful people in and OUTSIDE of the church who are aching to change the world. Those who hate the war we’re in; sickened by the pain our nation has caused; helplessly sympathetic to those who we’ve wounded and killed. And that’s not to mention global warming, growing economic disparity, child abuse and neglect…

We’re people who want a tide of change but who don’t see being “Yes Men” to “The Man” to be the way to do it. And I can see that…as I am clergy of a mainline denomination-- I am the Man (or Wo-man?!…) and I’m not always pleased with myself, where I am and what I’m supporting by being part of the status quo. I feel a tide, too. But it’s more often a drowning, not a “ride the wave,” sensation. Things are going the wrong way in the church and yet…. the emotional, physical, communal energy to shift it is like…yikes… just about too much.

So I declare myself irreverent to the need to be reverent—at least to the stuff that does not need reverence--the way things have been “just cuz” or because that’s the way things are “supposed to be”-- the systems that sustain, the meetings and institutions that kill—anything that just constantly deadens mind, energy and hope. I want to be reverent to the big stuff. Ya know-- like God. Like Jesus. The rest needs to take a back seat.

And now that I look at the clock…it’s past midnight, so…

that’s all I have to say about that.

Blog #1

I don’t know crap about writing a blog but I do know that sitting in my comfy, southern view, near-westside second floor church office I’m not going to be part of the movement to change the Church and the world if I don’t figure it out.

So, like all moderately-intelligent people, I surround myself with people who are smarter than I am. We’ve got a new administrative assistant—younger and much more competent than I—telling me what’s best regarding this computer stuff. Things are just better that way.

And, I’d like (sometimes) to think of myself the same way—though not about technology. As one of 17 (so I hear…) United Methodist clergy who are under 40 years old in the state of Wisconsin—I wish people would surround themselves with the “emergent” and emerging church (ME *grin*) to listen to what I and other young clergy have to say about the future of ministry (ha!).

To be fair—I’ve been blessed with a lot—a great church to serve and a wonderful city to live in, and a lot of opportunities to grow in my ministry. But I’m hungry. Hungry for so much more—people to know, folks to serve, wisdom to gain. So I often feel like I’m one of a dozen entry-level stewards on the ship yelling “Steer clear of the iceberg, steer clear of the iceberg!!” while everyone else in our mainline denomination is rearranging deck chairs on the ol’ Titanic.

So, I invite you to read this thing. Send me your thoughts; tell me when we can have coffee sometime. But more than anything, tell me how you’ve been touched by a first-century prophet who lived long ago, but still lives in you today. And if you don’t know him, I’ve got somebody for you to meet.