des

I am getting very confused on this board. Unless I have read every single post in a section (ie Progressive Christianity)it gets marked as unread. Sometimes even if I have read every post it is marked as unread. What gives? Is this a glitch of "invision". I think I can live with it, if so, but I do find it a bit annoying and confusing. Otherwise it has a nice new clean feel to it. Thanks, --des

Hi darby, Welcome back! :-) (Not that I have been too much around either lately). James, James. I would expect you not to "pick fights". As per St. Paul, well, as you know most of us here do not take the scriptures as literally written by God (or dictated), but are rather writings by humans in their particular time and place. Since the "rule of thumb" was common place (ie "don't hit your wife with anything bigger than the width of your thumb"), it was as Aletheia suggests, no doubt an enlightened stance. And there, may, as Carl suggests have been other factors for writing his statements (for instance, it could have been some particular women/woman). Or some other things for which we aren't even aware. As for liberals being sometimes sexist the other way (I mean female against male), I think sadly that is so. It is pretty human though. I think to imply in some way that the new leader of the Episcopal church shares that view is decidedly unfair. I also think it is unfair to allege that progressives as a group share that idea, even though individuals may. The celebration over the first women leader of the Episcopal church doesn't imply that that we would now be upset if a man were to be elected next!! In many of our views it is a milestone, more similar to the first woman astronaut or something like that. It doesn't mean we wouldn't want any more male astronauts. (Maybe others wouldn't make that type of contrast, but I do!!) James, I wish you would not attack certain members, I happen to feel that one you attacked is not really in a good place about the church and her own feelings on it, due to past experiences. BTW, Dave, I don't think James would like Spong. :-) (Sometimes he's even a little liberal for me. :-)) --des

Something like this: Witch parking only. Violators will be toad. :-) --des

I was just kidding though. OTOH, I also think deeper mystism is missing in most protestant churches-- Quakers are probably the exception here. Might sometimes happen, but there is something missing. (Though I have been to a few Quaker meetings.Perhaps I like talk to much. :-)) OTOH, I feel church is somehow in "real" vs.virtual community. And although I feel a connection with many people on this board (for instance), it somehow is different from community with real people. However, I will be happy to go to your website, as i think there is value in that too. --des

To carry forth my imperfect analogy, at one time in our history (before WW2) it was considered acceptable, even desirable, to keep low IQ (and again I am speaking of individuals who would appear normal otherwise) from having children. Of course, at one time it was considered more the norm that certain racial and ethnic groups would not have equal rights. And even that women were not equal. I think that this is an example of how we are 'growing" in terms of civilized behavior. I am thinking at some time that the issue of gay rights will seem just as strange in some decades-- because gay rights would be a matter of course, assumed. Jim Wallis and Tony Campolo, who are no means wildly liberal guys, think we should wait awhile on these issues. I think the idea of "waiting" is that they are assuming that this acceptance will eventually come about. I think that younger kids are more accepting of gays even in conservative families. I am guessing that the disorder idea is actual a more civilized form and on a continuum to acceptance. You know you have a state of rejection and revulsion first. Saying something is a disorder makes it less nasty. Ok, they have this condition, but they are still people who require these services (perhaps to cure them, or whatever), and then you would eventually get to acceptance. I'm not saying all individuals go thru this but that might be actually a kinder gentler stand. I have noticed how the far right sometimes will not even admit to gays genetic differences. If it is a lifestyle choice, then it is harder to say "well these are people who need our care, etc." There would be no reason to meet gays in any capacity, if they are just these bad people who take this lifestyle. But once they woudl get to the disorder stage they would be able to try and "help them", in the process they could figure out they that gays are more like them than different, and maybe they do not respond so well to "cures". I'm not saying the view of disorder necessarily leads to acceptance, because it obviously does not. But if society doesn't go in this direction, I'm guessing it might not go to accetance. OTOH, other cultures might be different. Some cultures have always had a place for deviants of some kind. Western culture's place is "disorder". --des

David: >If you participate in a worship service that reflects the power of the metaphor then I do not think you want to preach too much based upon what the metaphor should "rationally"mean. If you are doing some form of communion I think it is important to be explicit in the process as to whether this act is meant to be something that is understood as metaphor or not. How you lift up the metaphor in preparation for communion will have theological understanding but I do not think doing communion in this way will result in a common theology. Certain theologies will not work with "religious knowing" via the power of symbol/the metaphor. Those theologies that are open to the power of symbol/the metaphor can coexist within a denomination. So to some extent theology is important in that way but I do not think that a common theology is necessary for a denomination. I don't know David. I feel so strongly for doctrinal freedom that I would rebel against someone standing up and saying "This here communion, this is just a metaphor, and Jesus didn't really do any of this". :-) (not sure I would go that far either). So just how far and to what extent do individuals interpret these things. I'm sure people in our congregation do see it as much less metaphorical than I do. Otoh, some see it as much less so. I guess I am just not so serious about theology as you are, David. Otoh, I have been to communion services which were much closer to what I see as communion and I saw them as more meaningful, but to be honest it had more to do with this particular everyone came up around the table together vs passing the bread and wine (well grape juice) down the aisles. So it wasn't really what anyone said but how it was done. >Thank you for this input. I do not think that "top down" necessarily means the loss of the freedom that you talk about. I would ask whether within your own congregation you can see a split between the two Christs that I described. If so, does this limit the ability of your group to represent to the larger community who you are and what you are about? If you do not have such a conflict then more power to you!!! (I suspect that many more do have such a conflict than those that do not). David, I honestly don't know what other people think about various things. I know what certain people think. I know the pastor is more conservative than I am ( he is really a Lutheran, but as they don't allow gays...). but then I don't really care for his style of preaching so much to be honest. But I don't see a real clash as to values when we need to get things done. This is an activist, social gospel church essentially, and I am pretty comfortable with that aspect. I have never heard of any major dissension-- but like any human institution there are always disagreements. This was even more the case in the other UCC I went to. And I think the views of members were even more diverse. Hey, United Mystical Church of Christ. Now there's an idea!!! :-) Where can I sign up?? --des

I'm surprised that most UCC folks would care what you believed. No one has asked me what I believe. I might have volunteered info a few times. Though as I said many times UCC churches are pretty different from each other. (There was actually a pastor led discussion on the Gospel of Thomas, though since I was working when it was going on I didn't attend.) --des

Some thoughts on what David said.I would like a "new" church, though I am at times quite happy with UCC (and other times less so). Anyway, David said: > The United Church of Christ is not really united because "Christ" is either some version of the vision of evangelicals or some version of the vision of the "liberal" scholarship; "Christ" can not be both. The fact that most churches hide this division or at best cloud the difference is what has made a lot of people mad (why did my minister not tell us about this?). This clouding of the difference can be seen in Borg who on the one hand is so clear about his vision of Jesus but so unclear about what difference that makes to the life of the Church. I don't think the name was ever meant to be so grandeous. It was the "uniting" of several churches-- Congregational (at least across the Mississippi), Brethren of Christ, etc. and coalition with several others: Disciples of Christ, Metroplitan Church, etc. into one organization. Though the church has very little upper organization (the synod meets every 2 or 3 years) and each church is separate and isn't bound by the Synod. The fact that all UCCs are not the same is based on organizational structure which makes each church it's own. (I have heard of almost evangelical UCCs as well as very radical progressive ones, though most of them tend towards the liberal.) If there was a "higher authority" to rein in individual churches they would be more similar, but UCC takes on the congregational roots and each is self-governed and controlled. It also means that in any UCC you will see a range of beliefs from more traditional to probably identical to Unitarian. For ex. I consider the "trinity" more of an metaphor. I'm actually pretty comfortable with a democratic, self-run church, even if another structure might make it more unified in theology. I would not be comfortable in any church without doctrinal freedom, even if the "imposed" doctrine was more to my liking. --des

For Jimmy Carter, I would say, yes, that he may be much more conservative religiously-- the thing is that it doesn't seem to effect his world view or make him take an "agenda". I think this is much closer to Baptist belief pre: the revolt in the Southern Baptist church that turned it so reactionary. As for the comparison of homosexuality with genetic disorders, I am also uncomfortable. I think it is largely genetic, but I don't see it as a disorder. But there are other states of being that are primarily genetic that are not disorders. You could even say high intelligence is not always esp valued in our culture, but it isn't a disorder-- as I would say (and I'm sure others would disagree-- but outside of school mild retardation isn't really a disorder.) These things are more on a continuum of what is the cultural norm. We obviously were not meant to be created identically. --des

A number of weeks ago this group came and talked with our congregation. They are a group that is taking their "proclamations" of progressive and inclusive Christianity across the country. http://www.crosswalkamerica.org I had assumed they were visiting liberal or at least mainline protestant demoninations. However, I was wrong. This is really quite remarkable (even though I am pretty certain it isn't the norm for them): http://blog.crosswalkamerica.org/2006/05/0...baptist-church/ --des

Jimmy Carter and I think Bill Moyers as well (not sure about Bill Moyers though). Baptists have in their tradition belief in doctrinal freedom. At one time, they were pro-choice. Not so much because they favored abortion under any circumstance, but that they valued the individual's responsibility first. --des

So when are you going to Chicago? If you are going soon then I wouldn't rock the boat. I wouldn't rebel for the sake of rebelling. Though since you are in your 20s and I am in my 50s-- well any advice on that may be somewhat moot. But if you are going to Chicago, I'd say good-- it's a great city. Lousy weather but a great city. BTW, once there you might check out Wellington Ave. United Church of Christ, if you are anywhere near there. BTW, I agree with Flow that the relationship with your parents is one you shouldn't burn for the sake of burning. A bond with them will help you (and them) in many tough places. --des

Gee, I wasn't even thinking of my special ed. students during the year. I'm sure Jesus didn't mean to imply we should be as "adolescents"! YIKES! :-) I was speaking of my "normal" kids that I work with this summer. I don't know as I think childhood has changed in perhaps a not so good way-- different than childhood was when I was a kid about a hundred years ago. :-) Some of the K-2 kids were "too mature" for "Old MacDonald" and that type of song (one of them said, and on that farm is Brittany Spears?!). I think media, etc has forced kids to "know of" things they should not. OTOH, quite a few are delightful. As for special ed., many of the kids that are alive today, would not have been alive in Jesus' day or at least would not have ever ventured out of the house. Many children died for what would be trivial reasons today. For instance, autism is highly related to middle ear infections that may have killed many children circa 4 AD. One 105 degree fever and you are out. I have worked quite a lot with autistic kids (and adults). I don't know if Jesus ever said this. But I think you have to think of the best of childhood and before kids are too influenced by tv, commercial toys, etc. --des

Jen, I hate not to come up with a space time continuum problem for your printer, much as I like such things. But I think the problem of color is more something like this: You are using an ink jet cartridge. Most color ink jet cartridges have a yellow, magenta and cyan blue "tank". I would guess you are out of yellow. Of course it doesn't explain the problem going the other way. But I'm guessing black would stay black. It has it's own cartridge. However, you might try the cleaner utility. If that doesn't work then you're just left with a guardian angel, space time continuum, etc. problem. --des

I didn't see this here, what'ya'all think of the new women head of Episcopal church? Also supposedly the new head of the Southern Baptists is a kindler gentler one. As for above, about time, but I don't know about repackaging Southern Baptists-- think it is mostly a new package (as in old wine in new bottles). OTOH, some conservatives have been taking bolder stands lately-- global warming, conservation, AIDs. So who knows. Hope someone might have something more interesting to say. :-) --des

Just a guess, but I don't think Jesus knew some of the kids I work with, where "like a child" might not be such a good thing. :-) --des

Well it would be a LOT more work (though I am finding the space class is less work than the other one as I don't have to invent so much), and I don't know how I would do it without the internet. But it would be a neat model for education. Of course, you couldn't have NCLB (no child left untested) to constantly be checking for "accountability" (to tests) and "standards". It's interesting that most of the teachers that work there are regular public school teachers. Here's a litttle write up of what looks like the program 2 years ago. http://www.venueview.com/vv_design/sandia_..._web/summer.htm --des

BTW, typing in "Recovering Fundamentalist" (keep the quotes) produces interesting results!!! I have been reading on www.leavingfundamentalism.org. He's got everything: forum, articles, reviews, even a "hall of shame" (fundamentalism that give Christianity a bad name) and "hall of fame"(those that give it a good name). I don't think he differentiates between fundamentalism and evangelicalism (Tony Campala is there), but we're not all theology geeks. :-) --des

Hmm, we had kind of an updated creed last week. I have never heard it before. Also the last church I went to wrote their own "creed". Of course all this is interesting as UCC does NOT have a creed or at least ask that you take any specific creed. --des

I have pretty much complete freedom as far as what I teach and how I teach it. In fact, teachers create the actual course they are teaching. I kind of inherited the space exploration class but "invented" the other one (actually I like the space one better). The courses are 3 weeks an hour at a time. The only freedom we don't get is choosing the grade(s)/age(s) and the last day in the three weeks. Anyway there are (or have been) classes on the rainforest, "crime busters", math art, Harry Potter (I would like to teach that!), etc. I am trying to get together a more challenging all day space camp for next year which would include mission simulations, SCUBA, rocket launches, etc. A couple parents I talked to today said they signed their boys up so they could get more science. Very gifted kids both of them. I'm sure they prob. drive their parents wacky with all their curiosity! :-) This is quite a difference from the usual school year. There is minimal adminstration: keeping attendance and some stuff the last day. --des

Hi ya'll, This summer (like last) I am working in a summer education/camp program at a private school (see how the other half lives?). Anyway, I am teaching two hands on science classes: space exploration (rockets, playing with toys and figuring out how they would work in space and then watch video, various simulation games-- do stuff with gloves, etc.) and a light class (lenses, pinhole cameras, optical illusions, etc). I have two groups of each (1st- 3rd graders, and 4th-6th graders). It is fun, fun, fun but LOADS of work. But at least, as I told someone today, it is all teaching work and no administration work. --des

Me too (btw, I hate posts that say me too :-)), but gosh I have been getting tired of it. But I know you are doing your best and are doing a good job. It's just that spammers have more time and computer power on their hands than the rest of us. :-o --des

It's definitely 8!!! Where is Jean Luc Picard and Data when you need them to fix the rupture in the space time continuum??? (Not to mention Deanna Troi to tell you that you're hiding something?) --des

Marcus Borg's "Heart of Christianity" is my favorite I think. I also liked his "Reading the Bible again for the first time". And yes, UMC, PCUSA and UCC are a good start. Other choices: Disciples of Christ; Lutheran Church ECLA (only). There is also the Episcopal church if you like the ritual involved. --des

I thought the Da Vinci code was very good as well. Some of the book was a little hard to visualize (ok very hard to visualize) what with the changing scenes etc. And I have never been to the Louve. I thought they did quite a good job with the Teabing character. I also like how they handled the factual basis of the Priory of Scion ("that's what they'd want you to believe), casting Tom :-) as the skeptic (ok he is always "Big" to me). I wasn't as thrilled with the ending, except the little scene where she sticks her toe in the water, "I guess I'll try wine". I thought the sculptured tomb of Mary M. was a boring end. The only neat part was seeing him looking down all those levels of glass. But I did feel the book's more ambigious ending more satisfying, though I know that ambiguity is just about impossible in Hollywood. Yes, the car case scenes were silly, but I want a SmartCar so I can back down sidewalks. On a more serious note: i am not actually thrilled with the "holy bloodline" business. Strikes me too much of "the genetics of Jesus" means more than the message. OTOH, I am more interested in regaining of the sacred feminine. --des