- Dialogue - lists.wedgeblade.net

GLobal Schedule for April
by Sunny Walker 07 Apr '23

07 Apr '23

Hello from your Global Schedule Team, Here's the link to go and see what's happening this "Earth Month." There are a number of outstanding films and a study/conversation series, all related to climate and our love for this earth. And don't miss putting the next Global Archives Sojourn on your calendar for July. https://icaglobalarchives.org/social-research-center-events/ Grace and peace to all of you, On behalf of the Global Events Team, Sunny *Sunny Walker * *She/her/hers* *On **Arapaho, Cheyenne, Núu-agha-tʉvʉ-pʉ̱ (Ute), and Očeti Šakówiŋ (Sioux) tribal land* Certified Facilitator (Also Certified ToP Facilitator) ToP Methods Mentor Trainer - Upcoming Courses <https://www.top-training.net/w/> Virtual Facilitation Collaborative Senior Facilitator sunny.sunwalker(a)gmail.com 303-587-3017 For diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging inquiries: sunny(a)diversityinnovators.com www.diversityinnovators.com For virtual facilitation inquiries: sunny(a)virtualfacilitationcollaborative.com www.virtualfacilitationcollaborative.com

3 2

Tim’s latest
by James Wiegel 03 Apr '23

03 Apr '23

https://youtu.be/zw30G0Yslrc Jim Wiegel “…the long work of turning their lives into a celebration is not easy. Come and let us talk“. The Sunflowers. Mary Oliver

1 0

3/30/2023, Progressing Spirit: Rev. Irene Monroe:We are all wonderfully made; Spong revisited
by Ellie Stock 30 Mar '23

30 Mar '23

By Rev. Irene Monroe | | | | View this email in your browser | | | | | | | | | | | | | | We are all wonderfully made | | | | | | | | | | Essay by Rev. Irene Monroe March 30, 2023 "For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. Psalms 139:13-14,NIV Society has a problem with gender differences. People whose genders are not considered normal are forced to bear the weight of the grip cisgender heteronormative has on all our lives. In ancient Judaism, there was a range of gender identities: male characteristics, female characteristics, androgynous (both characteristics), and tumtum (not definitely both characteristics). Also, in ancient Judaism, it was understood that one's gender identity evolved over time. For example, someone born male later in life becomes a eunuch (saris), or someone born female later in life becomes "man-ish" (aylonit) Today's college students embrace and live out loud these various genders. The various gender-inclusive pronouns acknowledge and respect intersex, transgender, nonbinary, and gender-nonconforming people. Like so many colleges, my alma mater is wrestling with these issues. In February, Wellesley College students voted overwhelmingly to pass the Gender Inclusivity Ballot Question, allowing transgender men and nonbinary people who were assigned male at birth to be eligible for admission. Also, the Ballot Question requested the language used at the college be inclusive of its nonbinary and transgender students, thereby bridging the communication gap over gender-inclusive language between the administration and the student body. The college agreed to train and teach its staff and faculty about gender identity and pronoun use. However, the college administration's position on admitting trans men flatly stated, "there is no plan to change Wellesley's admissions policy or its mission as a women's college." Wellesley is one of the premier women's colleges in the country with noted alums like First Lady of the Republic of China, Madame Chiang Kai-shek, filmmaker Nora Ephron, television broadcast journalist Diane Sawyer, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, and 2016 Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, to name a few. However, Wellesley, like the few remaining women's colleges in this 21st century, will have to rethink its mission - "to provide an excellent liberal arts education to women who will make a difference in the world" - in a society that no longer adheres to the traditional gender binary of male and female. Today more people are identifying as transgender and nonbinary. According to a 2022 Pew Research Center, American young adults under 30 are more likely to identify as transgender or nonbinary than older adults, underscoring changing gender norms. And 44 percent of Americans now say they personally know a least one person who is transgender, and 20 percent know someone nonbinary, underscoring these are not invisible demographic groups in society any longer, especially on college campuses these days. College should be a safe space and atmosphere that engenders a positive sense of self for all students, which is the basis of educational achievement and personal growth. Too often, transgender students on college campuses must cope with being misgendered, and non-binary students must cope with the annoyance of gender binary labeling. I cannot imagine what it must feel like for transgender and nonbinary students to evolve into their authentic selves at Wellesley and not be acknowledged or affirmed, and how "the College's use of the words "women" and "alumnae" - and feel that their individual identities are not embraced." However, as an African American lesbian, I do know what it is like to feel uncertain in a space as an individual and part of an identity group and be made invisible or erased because of - intentional or unintentional - institutional and cultural biases, like the Black Church and black community. I, too, am a Wellesley College graduate. I was a student there when it was academically and socially unsafe to be openly lesbian. Because of both - intentional and unintentional - institutional and cultural biases, I stayed closeted for fear of stigmatization and discrimination. I didn't want to be disrespected or treated as an unvalued and unwelcome part of the college community. I remember those years as if they were yesterday, albeit it was decades ago. When I returned to Wellesley College as a Head-of-House, much had changed since my undergraduate years. For example, the freshman class was now called first-year students, and House Mothers, who were administrators of dormitories, were now called Heads-of- House. Having African American Heads-of-House was no longer unbelievable because I was one, and so, too, was Michelle Porche. In 1991 as the Head-of-House at Stone-Davis dormitories, the country had evolved further in understanding the fluidity of gender identities and sexual orientations, and the college took a giant step in hiring two out lesbians to run dormitories - Porsche, a graduate student at the Harvard School of Education, and me, a doctoral student at Harvard Divinity. Porsche arrived on campus with her white live-in partner, and some disdained interracial couples. I came with my mixed-breed dog, Heaven. Our hiring was controversial. The Campus Life section of The New York Times that year wrote, "To the administration, it was a "great step forward" to hire a lesbian with a live-in partner as a Head-of-House, but not a good idea to assign her to a dorm with a lot of first-year students" in the article "Wellesley; Counselor's Switch Prompts a Debate About Gay Rights." Wellesley survived our hiring, the then Board of Trustees didn't disband, and alums who threatened to withhold their donations didn't. The idea of admitting trans men is controversial, too. However, one of Wellesley's values is gender equality. "As a women's college, we have always been committed to gender equality as foundational to societal progress," it states on the college website. In an open letter to the Wellesley College Community titled "Affirming our mission and embracing our community," President Paula A. Johnson wrote, "Wellesley is a women's college that admits cis, trans, and nonbinary students - all who consistently identify as women. Wellesley is also an inclusive community that embraces students, alumnae, faculty, and staff of diverse gender identities. I believe the two ways of seeing Wellesley are not mutually exclusive. Rather, this is who we are: a women's college and a diverse community." Wellesley College was founded in 1870- five years after the Civil War and 50 years before women were allowed to vote - with the understanding that "women," as defined in that era, were a marginalized group and should have access to higher education. As women, we are a marginalized group still today. And, so, too, are transgender and nonbinary students. The Bible is replete with stories of various gender identities in God's people. These biblical stories affirm that we all are wonderfully made and affirm our God-given right to live them out loud. ~ Rev. Irene Monroe Read online here About the Author Rev. Irene Monroe does a weekly Monday segment, “All Revved Up!” on NPR's WGBH (89.7 FM). She is a weekly Friday commentator on New England Channel NEWS. Monroe is the Boston voice for Detour’s African American Heritage Trail, Guided Walking Tour of Beacon Hill: Boston’s Black Women Abolitionists. A Huffington Post blogger and a syndicated religion columnist, her columns appear in the Boston LGBTQ newspaper Baywindows, Cambridge Chronicle, and the Boston Globe. Monroe states her “columns are an interdisciplinary approach drawing on critical race theory, African American, queer and religious studies. As a religion columnist, I try to inform the public of religion’s role in discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people.” Her papers are at the Schlesinger Library at Radcliffe College’s research library on the history of women in America. Click here to visit her website. | | | | | | | | Question & Answer Q: By A Reader Why are so many progressive Christian churches dying? A: By Rev. Deshna Shine Dear Reader, I invite you to consider that there are many reasons why churches are dying or transitioning. Here are a few from my observation. 1. Outdated, irrelevant, exclusive liturgy Churches need to talk about how white supremacy is centered symbolically in their images, symbols, and language. Examples of this are images of a white Jesus, language that speaks of whiteness as being pure and blackness as being evil, women being absent from the imagery, and the divine only being seen and understood in the masculine or binary pronouns. Outdated, inaccessible, and exclusive liturgies contribute to empty seats. Symbols, language, music, curriculum, images, prayers, terms, metaphors... all of this matters and affects how many people and what types of people are drawn to the church. 2. White (progressive) polite culture White polite culture is the slow death of church communities across America. It is a dangerous, quiet, and hard-to-detect disease. It shows up as false kindness, greeting folks at the door but never fully seeing them or caring for them. It shows up as asking little of the pastor and fear of change. It is prideful, and it arises out of white fragility. It can be seen in the othering of folks who are different from the old guard of the church, often under the guise of helping those people. White progressive polite is a culture of avoidance and hero worship. Authenticity can not easily survive in communities with this culture. 3. Lack of a clear vision Too many churches do not have a clear vision of what their purpose is. When I visit a church, I want to clearly see the values of the church and how the community is living into those values. What actions are they taking? What level of discomfort are they willing to be in to be radically inclusive? I want to see a church that is clear on its mission and its values. Because if the church knows its purpose, it will know how to act when there is a gap to fill. I want to see a church that is doing the hard work of becoming radically authentic with each other. I want to see the church doing something to effect change. Be that in the lives of the congregants, their local town, or affecting state and national legislature. ~ Rev. Deshna Shine Read and share online here About the Author Rev. Deshna Shine is Project Director of ProgressiveChristianity.org’s Children’s Curriculum. She is an ordained Interfaith Minister, author, international speaker, and visionary. She grew up in a thriving progressive Christian church and has worked in the field for over 13 years. She graduated from UCSB with a major in Religious Studies and a minor in Global Peace and Security. She was Executive Director of ProgressiveChristianity.org, Executive Producer of Embrace Festival and has co-authored the novel, Missing Mothers. Deshna is passionate about sacred community, nourishing children spiritually and transforming Christianity through a radically inclusive lens. | | | | | | | | Please continue to send us your feedback… we are listening. We aim to give voice to many different perspectives that are relevant and inspiring along this spiritually progressing path. We are not here to tell you what to believe or how to act. We are here to support your journey, to share and learn together.Thank you for being a part of this community - join us on Facebook! | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In May of 1922, Rev. Harry Emerson Fosdick delivered a famed sermon with a central question, “Shall the Fundamentalists Win?” The central assertation of his sermon about the threat of fundamentalism shook the religious world to its core and cost him his job. Even though he spoke the words of this sermon over 100 years ago, reading through it all these years later leaves one with an eerie sense of relevance. Why? Because the fundamentalists won…or at the very least they defined the cultural concept of what it means to be Christian in America. Christianity that is concerned only with biblical inerrancy, individual salvation at the expense of others, defining life at conception, denying science, discriminating against LGBTQIA+ children of God, and ignoring history is antithetical to the actual life and teachings of Jesus. Fundamentalist Christianity isn’t Christianity at all, and it’s turning droves of people away from Christianity while causing substantial church-induced trauma. While fundamentalists have defined our cultural conversation for decades, it doesn’t have to stay that way. Through expanding social media, resources, and influence, ProgressiveChristianity.org has led an enormous effort to help people find an authentic, intellectually honest, and life-changing faith. Now is the time to galvanize people into action! Could you help us create this change? A recurring donation ensures that we can do this work for years to come and a one-time gift makes a huge difference. Thank you for your generosity! The Rev. Dr. Caleb J. Lines Co-Executive Director, ProgressiveChristianity.org | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Don't miss the next Episode of PC.org's Executive Directors Mark and Caleb on: The Moonshine Jesus Show - every Monday at 4:30pm Eastern Time – watch live on Facebook,, YouTube, Twitter, Podbean | | | | | | | | | Bishop John Shelby Spong Revisited Part IX Matthew Matthew Introduces Joseph - The Earthly Father of Jesus Essay by Bishop John Shelby Spong December 19, 2013 Matthew’s opening genealogy of Jesus is now complete with the intriguing idea that the line which produced Jesus of Nazareth, traveled not only through the royal family of the house of David, but also through four “tainted’ women: Tamar, who engaged in incest; Rahab, who was called a prostitute; Ruth, who achieved her goals through seduction, and Bathsheba, who was an adulterer. After this provocative introduction Matthew then moves on to introduce the rest of the cast of characters who will star in the drama he is about to write! The first of these characters is named Joseph. In the genealogy he was said to be both the son of Jacob and the man who was betrothed to Mary, the mother of Jesus. His role, as defined by Matthew, will be to act as the male protector of the Christ Child and thus to name him, which in Jewish society served to legitimize him. With this Matthean introduction, the character of Joseph enters the Christian tradition and he has remained deep in our affections from that day to this. He is immediately recognized as a strong silent presence standing behind Mary and the baby in a manger in the crèche scenes. We turn our focus now to Joseph, the earthly father of Jesus. I begin this look at Joseph with some biblical facts. First, Joseph as the name of Jesus’ presumptive father had never been mentioned before in any Christian source of which we are aware. Joseph received no mention in Paul, who died before any gospel had been composed. He received no mention in Mark, the earliest gospel. He was not mentioned in Q or the gospel of Thomas, both of which some people argue were written prior to Mark (I am not one of them!). So Matthew is the first person ever to refer to one called Joseph as the father of Jesus. Second, as soon as the birth narratives are complete, Joseph disappears from the Christian scriptures forever. Luke stretches his birth narrative out long enough to relate the account of the boy Jesus, at age twelve, going up to Jerusalem with Mary and Joseph. That is the closest Joseph comes to appearing in the adult life of Jesus and that Lucan story, which seems to be based on a story drawn from the life of Samuel, is widely questioned. The fact is, however, that Joseph never again appears in any gospel account. When I was a child attending Sunday school in my evangelical Episcopal Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, this absence of Joseph from any mention in the life of the adult Jesus was explained by suggesting that Joseph probably died while Jesus was still a lad. The tradition of this early death was reinforced by the nativity scenes painted by the master artists through the centuries. All portray Joseph as a much older man, thus enforcing the possibility of his death in Jesus’ childhood. Joseph’s elderly depiction, however, came into Christianity primarily through a late second century apocryphal gospel known as the Proto-Gospel of James. This narrative purported to tell of the early life of the mother of Jesus, prior to her introduction in the gospel tradition as the bearer of the messiah. This obviously mythological Proto-Gospel of James reflected much later and highly developed ideas about Mary’s virginity, but it became popular as it filled in the gaps of what was at that time thought of as a literal story. In this late second century work, Mary at her birth was handed over to some holy women to raise so that she would be prepared to serve as the vessel in whose womb the Christ Child would be formed. So Mary was not just protected in these early years, she was also formed in holiness. When she reached the age of puberty, however, Jewish society required that she have a male protector. There was no father of Mary in the story, who might have served in this role so these holy women set up a process by which they would choose a proper husband for Mary and thus bring a male protector into the picture. There was one problem, however. Mary’s virginity would have to be honored and protected by whoever was to become her husband. Thus these holy women decided to look only at older men, perhaps widowed men with grown children, and thus presumably too old to be interested in sex. I don’t know how old that is, but it is old! So the pursuit of the perfect husband for Mary was conducted and through a series of miraculous signs, such as his staff sprouting flowers, Joseph became the one chosen. With this story in the tradition, Joseph was forever afterwards portrayed as elderly. So, it was said, his absence in the adult life of Jesus might well be explained by his death early in Jesus’ life. There is, however, another possibility to which I have already hinted, which I would like to examine in more detail. Perhaps Joseph was a literary character created by Matthew to fill a role in the miraculous drama that he was creating about the birth of Jesus to a virgin mother. In his scenario, there was no father to name the baby Jesus and to serve as his protector. Without this protective male presence, this child would have had to deal with the enormous prejudice and social hostility that accompanied one whose paternity was in question. Let me urge you not to resist this idea on first hearing, but to hold your judgment until the evidence is presented. If Matthew was going to create a literary character to serve as the earthly father of Jesus, is there some compelling reason why Matthew would choose to name him Joseph? Well, yes, there is, but one would not know this unless one was aware of Jewish history, as both Matthew, an obvious Jewish writer, and the community for which Matthew wrote, certainly were. The Hebrew people had always been divided into two camps. After the reign of King Solomon, these people split into two competitive nations, Judah in the south and Israel, which came to be known as the Northern Kingdom, in the North. This division of the Hebrew people, however, was far older than even that. Biblical folklore accounted for it by saying that while Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel, was the common father of all the Hebrew people, the two segments of this nation had had separate mothers. Recall the Genesis story in which Jacob was tricked into marrying Leah, the sister of the woman, Rachel, for whose hand in marriage he had worked for seven long years. Leah then became the mother of Judah, whose progeny formed the nation of Judah, while Rachel became the mother of Joseph, whose progeny formed the Northern Kingdom. Recall that the heirs of Levi, who was also a son of Leah, did not form a tribe, but became the Levites, the holy people who crossed all tribal boundaries. So to keep the number of the tribes of the Hebrew people at twelve, Joseph was given two tribes named for his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh. The other Hebrew tribes were gradually melded into these Joseph tribes. So dominant was the tribe of Ephraim in the North that the Old Testament actually uses the name Ephraim as a synonym for the nation called Israel. So the two major patriarchs in Jewish history were Judah and Joseph. Hebrew folklore portrayed them always as rivals. This is revealed in the Genesis story of Joseph’s favoritism reflected in his coat of many colors, while his brother Judah was portrayed as the one suggesting that he be sold into slavery. Part of the messiah’s task, according to Matthew, was to bring the covenant people together which meant that messiah must unite the tribe of Judah with those of Joseph making a single whole. In the genealogy Matthew had just traced, Jesus’ lineage through David and Solomon to the kings of Judah, which secured Jesus’ connection with the Judah part of the Hebrew nation. To make Joseph the name of the earthly father of Jesus would bring the other half of that nation into the picture. So the heir of the Judean King David was protected and legitimized by a father named Joseph. It was a perfect solution. Judah and Joseph were brought together in this first story of the birth of the messiah. So in Jesus at his birth, Matthew was claiming, that the divided “chosen” nation had become once more in this messiah, one people. Now, if you have journeyed with me this far, let me explore a second question. If Matthew is the creator of the character Joseph, who serves as Jesus’ earthly father, from where did Matthew get the biographical data that he used to build this literary figure? To answer this we look at the details provided for us in Matthew 1 and 2, which are the only places in scripture where we are told anything about this Joseph. There we discover three things. First, Joseph has a father whose name is Jacob. Second, according to Matthew, God only speaks to Joseph in dreams. In a dream God tells Joseph to take his wife for the child within her is holy. In a dream Joseph is warned to escape the wrath of King Herod. In a dream he is told when it is safe to return to their home in Bethlehem. In a dream, he is directed to move the messianic child from Bethlehem to the safety of Nazareth in Galilee. Everywhere in Mathew’s narrative his Joseph is associated with dreams. Last, the role that Matthew assigns to Joseph in this drama is to save the life of the messianic child by taking him down to Egypt. Now go back to the story of the patriarch Joseph in the book of Genesis (37-50) and see what biographical details we can learn about this earlier Joseph. We discover there three things. First, this Joseph has a father named Jacob. Second, this Joseph is overwhelmingly identified with dreams. He is called “the dreamer” and he rises to political power in Egypt by interpreting the dreams of the Pharaoh. Third, his role in the drama of salvation is to save the people of the covenant from death in a famine and he does this by taking them down to Egypt. Do you think these things are coincidental? Or are you beginning to understand the interpretive clue that unlocks the gospels. The gospels are Jewish books that weave the stories of the Hebrew Scriptures around Jesus of Nazareth as the primary means of claiming that he is the expected messiah. To read the gospels literally is to misunderstand them totally. Literalism is a Gentile heresy! The gospels are Jewish books that must be read with Jewish eyes. Nothing reveals this more clearly than the story of Joseph, the earthly father of Jesus. So Joseph is established in the birth narrative. The holy child is born to Mary and when this series resumes, we will turn to the star in the east and the journey of the Magi. ~ John Shelby Spong | | | | | | | | Announcements Matzah Making with Rabbi Brian Online April 2nd - 2 Sessions: either 10 am or 2 pm (Pacific Time) In 1503, in Northern Spain, just like she did the year before, Angelina de Leon kneaded dough of flour, eggs, olive oil and flavored it with pepper and honey. She flattened small cakes and pricked them with a fork so they wouldn’t rise. Angelina wondered for how many more years would she have to do this in secret. Celebrating Passover was against the law. Her preparations were seen by her maid, Maria Sancho, who testified this matter to the Inquisition. Angelina and her family were found out to be secret Jews. READ ON ... | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

2 1

3/23/2023, Progressing Spirit: Rev. Dr. Robin Meyers: Blaming Progressives for the Death of the Church; Spong revisited
by Ellie Stock 23 Mar '23

23 Mar '23

By Rev. Dr. Robin Meyers | | | | View this email in your browser | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Blaming Progressives for the Death of the Church | | | | | | | | | | Essay by Rev. Dr. Robin Meyers March 23, 2023 Tim Keller has written a scathing account of why the church is dying. It is the fault of progressives in the mainline tradition who have watered down the supernatural certainties of Christianity and blended them impotently with secular, individualistic, and apologetic ethical systems that leave God out of the equation, not to mention the cross. If you have not read it, you should: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/tim-keller-decline-renewal-ameri… When you read it, keep a pencil handy and see what counterarguments you are prepared to make, because this is theological gaslighting at its best, and simple-minded scapegoating at its worst. He begins by recalling the zenith of American religion, the post-WWII generation that flourished in the suburbs and made babies and went to church and knew that the Ten Commandments were not the Ten Suggestions. We couldn’t build enough new Christian education wings in those days, and everyone knew the difference between right and wrong. God was in His heaven, and you didn’t make up faith as you went along. You submitted to it—which meant you agreed to believe fervently in things Jesus never talked about and did not seem at all interested in. Then the trouble began in the 1960s, as people challenged the authority of everything, including the Bible, which Keller said was now thought to be “unreliable.” Churches began to shrink, led by the mainlines, not because a new generation caught the stench of hypocrisy, or because they questioned the authority of a profoundly Patriarchal and fear-based religious empire, but rather because they rebelled again the whole idea of transcendent truths. Without supernatural authority, the church lost both its power and its reason for being. Sex, drugs, and rock in roll was not just the pendulum swinging away from a suburban hellscape of rigid conformity and female captivity, but a sign that we could make up life as we went along, and if it felt good it was good. Seminaries began to teach a modern critique of the Bible, said Keller. “The Bible was never allowed to critique modern thought or popular opinion but only to mirror it.” This was news to me, since as a seminarian from the 70s, I found the scripture to be scathingly critical of greed, selfishness, and injustice. But to be fair, I also found it to be a product of its time. I had no intention to let its embrace of slavery critique emancipation, or to allow it to define women as the property of their fathers until they became the property of their husbands. Keller quotes the critiques of two theologians, Dean Kelley (Why Conservative Churches are Growing, 1972), and J. Gresham Machen (Christianity and Liberalism, 1923), who regard the death of church as the abandonment of orthodox Christian teachings. Kelley says that only those teachings that give life “large-scale” cosmic meaning will sustain the church. Now it’s just “I’m OK, you’re OK, but the System Sucks.” He goes on to say that we have rejected the idea of literal miracles and reduced religion to an ethical system undifferentiated from modern philosophical and psychological theories. Perhaps the situation is more nuanced. The miracles, for example, were often performed on behalf of God’s chosen, or offered as proof of the divinity of Jesus. The parting of the Red Sea, for example, and the subsequent genocide of Egyptian soldiers, is a great story if you are the mother of a Hebrew son who is escaping bondage, but a terrible story if you are the mother of an Egyptian soldier. Then as now, many claims of the miraculous are little more than someone’s self-interested claim that God loves everyone, but especially me. Nevertheless, writes Keller, mainline churches dropped traditional Christian ethical strictures around sex and money. Really? Or is it the case that a whole generation saw how fearful and obsessed the evangelical church was with human sexuality, how fervently it sought to control it, and still seeks to control it. As for greed, it’s not the mainline church that is obsessed with what other people are doing in bed Or, when it comes to greed, it is not mainline churches that preach the so-called “prosperity gospel,” name-it-and-claim-it, or blab-it-and-grab it. Me thinks Keller doth protesteth too much. He also blames progressives for identifying too much with one political party and its policies. Good point. That is indeed misplaced faith. But evangelicals have done the same, and most evangelicals would now return to power the vilest human being ever to be president--a man who is the answer to the question, What Would Jesus Not Do? Looking for a political savior is indeed dangerous, but so is assuming that all political systems are created equal, and that all policy is equally Christian. If it was, Jesus would have debated the corruption of the Temple Dove Selling Business outside on the steps, instead of going inside to turn over tables and drive out the merchants with a whip. Keller says that too many of us regard the Bible stories as “legends.” That’s an interesting word with a certain derogatory Hollywood flavor. We regard them as myths containing truths too large to be reduced to what did or did not actually happen. But at the core of Keller’s argument is that the church would be restored to greatness if only we went back to believing the fairy tale instead of deconstructing and reconstructing it. In other words, true faith is about believing things you know are not true to get rewards that you doubt are available. Strangely, this critique of the death of church as spawned by progressives is really another way of saying that we failed to remain intellectually dishonest about how we got the Bible, what it means to call it our flawed but irreplaceable Story of Origin, and what scholars have now shown us about the enormous gap between faith as developed doctrine and faith as discipleship--a commitment to being followers of Jesus, not worshippers of Christ. We may be a lot smaller, but like leaven in the loaf, we may also be more subversive. What the article overlooks is the fact that since our supposed heyday in the 50s, ALL organized religion is now in decline, including evangelicalism. So perhaps it has something to do with how poorly we all performed in meeting the real challenges of our time. If “By your fruits you shall know them,” then perhaps the bananas look rotten, and the peaches bruised beyond recognition because nobody is buying. Surely no one thinks that if we just returned to supernatural orthodoxy, the world’s problems would be solved because then only some people would go to heaven while everyone else burns in hell. Rampant and even narcissistic individualism is indeed a problem in our time, but how does orthodoxy make us more communal? Conformity is not community. It is religious authoritarianism. Finally, I’m tired of people saying that progressives are just do-gooders whose Bestie is Jesus. There are few things I can think of that are more selfish, or more profoundly narcissistic, than believing that God sent Jesus to die just for me before I was born and without my doing anything to earn it. This is not how you build community around transcendent values. It’s how you train true-believers and negate the ethical imperatives of the Sermon on the Mount. It’s how you hang on to your own power. There is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the death of church. But perhaps this is exactly what is supposed to be happening. The gospel truth is that all reorientation is preceded by disorientation. Read the parables of Jesus. The church as we have known it is indeed dying. We have indeed become the Disunited States of America. But not because we stopped believing. Rather, because so many of us stopped believing in the unbelievable. ~ Rev. Dr. Robin Meyers Read online here About the Author Rev. Dr. Robin Meyers is pastor of First Congregational Church UCC, Norman, Oklahoma, and retired senior minister of Mayflower Congregational UCC church, Oklahoma City. He is currently a Professor of Public Speaking and Distinguished Professor of Social Justice Emeritus in the Philosophy Department at Oklahoma City University. He is a fellow of the Westar Institute and the author of eight books on religion and American culture, the most recent of which is, Saving God from Religion: A Minister’s Search for Faith in a Skeptical Age. A feature-length documentary chronicles his work on behalf of Progressive Christianity in Oklahoma (americanhereticsthefilm.com) and more information is at RobinMeyers.com | | | | | | | | Question & Answer Q: By A Reader How does the death of Jesus 2000 years ago save me? What is the substitutionary doctrine of the atonement? A: By Bishop John Shelby Spong Dear Reader, Your question lies at the heart of what I believe is the need for a radical reformation in Christian thought. The substitutionary doctrine of the atonement makes several pre-suppositions - 1) People were created good, whole and perfect. 2) The human race fell into sin through an act of disobedience and from this fall they are not able to save themselves. 3) God had to become the rescuer so God chose Abraham, gave the law, sent the prophets and finally, when all of these rescue operations failed, had to take on the role of the savior personally. Jesus was the form, which the divine rescue took. The Cross was the place where the price of this fall was paid. The Cross was said to be timeless. Through the Eucharist (in Catholic Christianity) or through the experience of "accepting Jesus as my personal Savior" in the Protestant tradition, every believer can appropriate the fact that God substituted Jesus for each of us and laid the punishment for our sins on him. So the phrase, "Jesus died for my sins," has become a sort of Christian mantra. In a number of varieties this theory became the doctrine of the atonement which simply means to be made "at one" with God. Most people do not grasp the fact that the roots of this Doctrine are in Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement, when a lamb was slain for the sins of the people and the blood of this lamb was sprinkled on the people as a cleansing agent. When Christians refer to Jesus as the Lamb of God "who takes away the sins of the world," they are using Yom Kippur language. This doctrine has serious problems and I believe must be rejected in the New Reformation that is upon us. Let me enumerate those problems quickly: - What kind of God is it who requires a sacrifice and a blood offering before this God can forgive? - What kind of God is it who delights in human sacrifice? - Was there ever a time when human beings were perfect and fell into sin? Since Charles Darwin's understanding of evolution emerged in the 19th century, we have come to see life as having evolved from a single cell to Homo sapiens over a 4 1/2 - 5 billion year time frame. Where is the 'fall' in that process? - Does human evil arise from a fall that never happened metaphorically? Or is evil a manifestation of the baggage of our evolutionary fight for survival that made human life radically self-centered in the struggle to stay alive? - Must salvation take the form of a rescue from our sins or can it be portrayed as the empowerment to evolve into a new humanity, that will somehow learn to live for others? I believe we need to start with a new definition of human life and then move on to re-think the person and work of the Christ. Unless that occurs, I do not believe that these traditional but still primitive ideas will be able to sustain the Christian faith in the 21st century. ~ Bishop John Shelby Spong Read and share online here | | | | | | | | Please continue to send us your feedback… we are listening. We aim to give voice to many different perspectives that are relevant and inspiring along this spiritually progressing path. We are not here to tell you what to believe or how to act. We are here to support your journey, to share and learn together.Thank you for being a part of this community - join us on Facebook! | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | As a non-profit ProgressiveChristianity.org/Progressing Spirit rely heavily on the good will of our donors to help us continue to bring individuals and churches the messages of progressive Christians, Weekly Newsletters, along with the many other resources we provide. For years, the majority of our fundraising came at the end of the year. Looking at various ways to create a more reasonable amount of cash flow we decided rather than having a BIG ask at the end of each year, our more frequent asks give folks a chance to contribute when their funds are more flexible. We think that's a win for everyone. We also want to highlight the opportunity to become a sustaining supporter. If you are looking for the best way to help us continue to provide progressive Christian resources, become a sustaining supporter by choosing Recurring Donation. Help keep ProgressiveChristianity.org online and going strong - click here to donate today! * Another way to support us is to leave a bequest in your Will and/or Trust designating us a beneficiary. | | | | | | | | | | | Don't miss the next Episode of PC.org's Executive Directors Mark and Caleb on: The Moonshine Jesus Show - every Monday at 4:30pm Eastern Time – watch live on Facebook,, YouTube, Twitter, Podbean | | | | | | | | | Bishop John Shelby Spong Revisited Part VIII Matthew: What is the Meaning of the Virgin Birth? Essay by Bishop John Shelby Spong November 21, 2023 It is difficult for most Christians to imagine that the story of Jesus’ virgin birth was a late developing tradition in the Christian faith, yet it appears to have been totally unknown until it is introduced in the middle years of the ninth decade in the writings of Matthew. Matthew’s story of Jesus’ birth is the oldest nativity narrative in the New Testament. Yet, strangely enough, it is not the most familiar. That designation goes to Luke primarily because most of us get our knowledge of the birth story of Jesus by attending annual Christmas pageants. The story line in almost all pageants follows Luke’s narrative with an annunciation by the Angel Gabriel to Mary in the village of Nazareth and an account of the journey of Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem to be enrolled for some taxation purpose in compliance with an order issued by Caesar Augustus. Then there is the scene where they are told there is no room at the inn, so when the baby Jesus is born, he is wrapped in swaddling cloths (not clothes but cloths) and placed in an animal’s feeding trough or manger. The scene then shifts to hillside shepherds, to whom angels, breaking through the midnight sky, bring the announcement of Jesus’ birth. This then prompts the shepherds to go to Bethlehem to find the baby. When this task is accomplished they depart, leaving Mary to ponder these things and their meaning in her heart. This is where Luke’s story ends, but in the typical church pageant another scene is tacked on to this narrative. This final scene features a star in the east, the journey of the Magi who follow that star, their arrival at a house in Bethlehem and the presentation of their gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh. This merger of separate and incompatible stories is a nightmare for biblical expositors, but churches have never allowed biblical scholarship to get in the way of a good pageant! Matthew’s story is, by a minimum of ten years, the first account of Jesus’ birth in the New Testament. From where, we must wonder, did Matthew get the idea of a virgin birth and the narrative details with which he surrounds it? There are supernatural birth stories in the Hebrew Scriptures, but the miracle there is either a post-menopausal pregnancy, as was the case of Abraham and Sarah in the birth of Isaac, which is recorded in the book of Genesis, or the overcoming of what the Bible called “barrenness” and the ability to conceive after much prayer and fasting, as was the case with Hannah in the birth of her son Samuel. So the first thing we need to establish is that the idea of a “virgin birth” for Jesus is quite outside the normal boundaries of Hebrew thought. There is certainly no evidence of a “virgin birth” tradition in any Christian sources prior to the writing of Matthew. There are two written sources that we are certain are pre-Matthew, namely the epistles of Paul, who wrote between 51 and 64, or some 30-40 years before Matthew introduced the idea of the virgin birth, and Mark, the first gospel to be written that appears to be some10-15 years earlier than the writing of Matthew’s gospel. There are also two writings which some scholars like to date early in Christian history: they are the Q document and the gospel of Thomas. I do not wish in this column to get into the debate about the dating of these two documents or even about the accuracy of the Q hypothesis. Let me simply state that I have never been convinced of the existence of the Q document and I see no reason to date the gospel of Thomas earlier than the first years of the second century. If, however, both Q’s existence and an early date for both Q and Thomas could be established beyond reasonable doubt, the fact would still remain that there is no mention of a virgin birth for Jesus prior to Matthew’s introduction of this idea in the middle of the ninth decade. Paul says only two things about Jesus’ origins. He first claims that Jesus was descended from King David “according to the flesh.” That in itself was neither a dramatic nor a special claim. David lived a thousand years before Jesus and had an unspecified number of wives. We know he had many children. In the thousand years, or approximately 50 generations that separated David from Jesus, the direct heirs of David would have included almost every Jew since there would have been about a billion direct heirs! Paul’s second claim is quite mundane: “He was born of a woman,” said Paul. Nothing unusual about that! That is the story of us all. Then Paul adds,” He was born under the law!” That was the reality of every Jew. Paul had clearly never heard of a miraculous birth tradition, primarily, I believe, because such a tradition had not developed prior to Paul’s death. The same thing appears to be true of Mark. Mark includes two narratives that point to the fact that he had never heard of a miraculous birth tradition. First, there is Mark’s story of Jesus’ baptism with which he opens his gospel. Jesus in this narrative is a completely normal human being who comes to John the Baptist to be baptized. It is in this baptism that the Spirit of God enters him and it is at his baptism that God is said to have proclaimed him: “my son.” If the baptism was the moment of the God-infusing of Jesus, then clearly there is the assumption that his birth was routine and ordinary. The second revealing note in Mark is that in chapter three the mother of Jesus is reported to have responded negatively to his public ministry and to his notoriety and to have moved to “take him away.” The text says that his mother and his brothers thought he was “beside himself,” or out of his mind. That is hardly the response of a woman in whose virginal womb this Jesus was found. Mark gives no evidence that he had ever heard the story of Jesus’ miraculous birth, primarily, I believe, because it had not yet been developed. Matthew is its originator. It was a ninth decade addition to the developing Jesus story. If that is so, as I am convinced it is, then we need to ask why a miraculous birth was an appealing idea to Matthew. Here we can only speculate, but at least these speculations are educated. There appears to have been an attack made on Jesus’ legitimacy, probably by the enemies of the Jesus movement. A popular line of attack against religious change agents in the first century was to raise suspicions about their origins, to question their paternity. Religious troublemakers were all thought to be base born people. The reason we can be fairly certain that these attacks were abroad is that two of them appear in the texts of the other gospels. The first is found in Mark. After an impressive sermon in the synagogue in his home region, Mark says that the crowd began to question from where it was that Jesus had gotten such wisdom. In that context anonymous voices in the crowd began to question his origins. “Is not this the carpenter?” they asked. Then they continued this probing of his roots by saying “Is not this the son of Mary.” This was the first time in any written Christian document that the name “Mary” is used for the mother of Jesus. Perhaps more importantly, however, is the fact that in first century Jewish society, to refer to a grown man as the son of a woman was to raise public questions about his paternity and thus about his legitimacy. The charge of illegitimacy was surely around in that period of time when the life of Jesus was being portrayed. The second illustration of this same thing comes at a somewhat later date. It is recorded only in the eighth chapter of the gospel of John. Once again a crowd is discussing Jesus’ origins. He cannot be the Christ, they assert, because no one will know the origins of the messiah, but “we know where this man (Jesus) comes from.” Later, a voice in the crowd is quoted as saying to Jesus: “We were not born of fornication.” The NRSV translates this text: “We were not illegitimate.” The clear impression is that Jesus was. I suspect that these attacks on Jesus’ origins and the questions about his paternity were so prevalent that Matthew decided to defend him against these charges. For this purpose, he developed his narrative of the virgin birth, which covers Jesus with legitimacy by asserting that Jesus was conceived and born without benefit of a male agent. He was “the Son” of God. To buttress his story, Matthew found a text in Isaiah (7:14) on which he could base his story, thus portraying the virgin birth as the fulfillment of the scriptures. He proceeded to interpret that text so that he had it read, “Behold a virgin will conceive.” The only problem with this interpretation was that this is not what the text actually said at all. It said rather, “Behold, a woman is with child.” Those two things are clearly not the same! Nevertheless, Matthew used it and he wrapped around it the mythology of celestial bodies that announced this wondrous birth and guiding stars, which brought Gentiles to pay him homage with gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh, each of which was highly symbolic. This child is holy, Matthew was proclaiming, this life is the child of Almighty God. Did Matthew recognize how weak his argument was? I think he did and that is why he opened his story of Jesus’ virgin birth with 17 verses dedicated to Jesus’ ancestry in which he has included the four sexually-compromised women. What Matthew was saying is that Jesus is of God. His is a holy life, but his holiness lay in the fact that he was born of the Spirit, not that his flesh was divine. By the time the Fourth Gospel was written, to be born of the Spirit had very different connotations from the suggestions that the Holy Spirit was your biological father. Matthew is also saying that even if you are not convinced by his supernatural argument, God can still raise up a holy life even if God has to work through the incest of Tamar, the prostitution of Rahab, the seduction of Ruth and the adultery of Bathsheba. That is why Matthew begins his story of Jesus’ birth with the “shady ladies” of the genealogy. Do you see how rich this story is when the text is not literalized and when one dares to read it with Jewish eyes? ~ John Shelby Spong | | | | | | | | Announcements Ecofeminism for a Suffering World: A Prophetic Call to Joyous Acts of Restoration. Threats to our global communities are increasing at rapid rates. Our living communities are at grave risk, and the implications of these issues affect everyone. What are some ways we can respond? Eco-feminist interpretation of Scripture can be a powerful catalyst for spiritual reflection and sustained action. While exploring the book of Ruth and Jeremiah 31, we will consider what fidelity and joy can look like when we use our skills, resources, and hearts to cherish and restore the natural world— honoring all living beings! Professor Sharp’s research explores the poetics, narrative art, and theology of biblical texts as resources for homiletical theory and practice. March 25th 4pm at St. Peter’s Episcopal Church, Morristown, NJ Tickets: $10 READ ON ... | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

1 0

3/16/2023, Progressing Spirit: Rev. Jess Shine: I’m tired of giving to charities; Spong revisited
by Ellie Stock 16 Mar '23

16 Mar '23

I’m tired of giving to charities.#yiv0237014684 p{margin:10px 0;padding:0;}#yiv0237014684 table{border-collapse:collapse;}#yiv0237014684 h1, #yiv0237014684 h2, #yiv0237014684 h3, #yiv0237014684 h4, #yiv0237014684 h5, #yiv0237014684 h6{display:block;margin:0;padding:0;}#yiv0237014684 img, #yiv0237014684 a img{border:0;height:auto;outline:none;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0237014684 body, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684bodyTable, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684bodyCell{min-height:100%;margin:0;padding:0;width:100%;}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnPreviewText{display:none !important;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684outlook a{padding:0;}#yiv0237014684 img{}#yiv0237014684 table{}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684ReadMsgBody{width:100%;}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684ExternalClass{width:100%;}#yiv0237014684 p, #yiv0237014684 a, #yiv0237014684 li, #yiv0237014684 td, #yiv0237014684 blockquote{}#yiv0237014684 a .yiv0237014684filtered99999 , #yiv0237014684 a .yiv0237014684filtered99999 {color:inherit;cursor:default;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0237014684 p, #yiv0237014684 a, #yiv0237014684 li, #yiv0237014684 td, #yiv0237014684 body, #yiv0237014684 table, #yiv0237014684 blockquote{}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684ExternalClass, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684ExternalClass p, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684ExternalClass td, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684ExternalClass div, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684ExternalClass span, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684ExternalClass font{line-height:100%;}#yiv0237014684 a .yiv0237014684filtered99999 {color:inherit !important;text-decoration:none !important;font-size:inherit !important;font-family:inherit !important;font-weight:inherit !important;line-height:inherit !important;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684bodyCell{padding:10px;}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684templateContainer{max-width:600px !important;border:5px solid #363232;}#yiv0237014684 a.yiv0237014684mcnButton{display:block;}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImage, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnRetinaImage{vertical-align:bottom;}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent{}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent img{height:auto !important;}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnDividerBlock{table-layout:fixed !important;}#yiv0237014684 body, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684bodyTable{}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684bodyCell{border-top:0;}#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684templateContainer{border:5px solid #363232;}#yiv0237014684 h1{color:#202020;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:26px;font-style:normal;font-weight:bold;line-height:125%;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:left;}#yiv0237014684 h2{color:#202020;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:22px;font-style:normal;font-weight:bold;line-height:125%;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:left;}#yiv0237014684 h3{color:#202020;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:20px;font-style:normal;font-weight:bold;line-height:125%;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:left;}#yiv0237014684 h4{color:#202020;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:18px;font-style:normal;font-weight:bold;line-height:125%;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:left;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templatePreheader{background-color:#FAFAFA;background-image:none;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:center;background-size:cover;border-top:0;border-bottom:0;padding-top:9px;padding-bottom:9px;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templatePreheader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templatePreheader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p{color:#656565;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templatePreheader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent a, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templatePreheader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p a{color:#656565;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateHeader{background-color:#FFFFFF;background-image:none;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:center;background-size:cover;border-top:0;border-bottom:0;padding-top:9px;padding-bottom:0;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateHeader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateHeader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p{color:#202020;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:16px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateHeader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent a, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateHeader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p a{color:#007C89;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateBody{background-color:#FFFFFF;background-image:none;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:center;background-size:cover;border-top:0;border-bottom:2px solid #EAEAEA;padding-top:0;padding-bottom:9px;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateBody .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateBody .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p{color:#202020;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:16px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateBody .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent a, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateBody .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p a{color:#007C89;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateFooter{background-color:#FAFAFA;background-image:none;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:center;background-size:cover;border-top:0;border-bottom:0;padding-top:9px;padding-bottom:9px;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateFooter .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateFooter .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p{color:#656565;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;line-height:150%;text-align:center;}#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateFooter .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent a, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateFooter .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p a{color:#656565;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}@media only screen and (min-width:768px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684templateContainer{width:600px !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 body, #yiv0237014684 table, #yiv0237014684 td, #yiv0237014684 p, #yiv0237014684 a, #yiv0237014684 li, #yiv0237014684 blockquote{}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 body{width:100% !important;min-width:100% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnRetinaImage{max-width:100% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImage{width:100% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCartContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionTopContent, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnRecContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionBottomContent, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnTextContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnBoxedTextContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageGroupContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionLeftTextContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionRightTextContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionLeftImageContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionRightImageContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageCardLeftTextContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageCardRightTextContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageCardLeftImageContentContainer, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageCardRightImageContentContainer{max-width:100% !important;width:100% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnBoxedTextContentContainer{min-width:100% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageGroupContent{padding:9px !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionLeftContentOuter .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionRightContentOuter .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent{padding-top:9px !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageCardTopImageContent, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionBottomContent:last-child .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionBottomImageContent, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionBlockInner .yiv0237014684mcnCaptionTopContent:last-child .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent{padding-top:18px !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageCardBottomImageContent{padding-bottom:9px !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageGroupBlockInner{padding-top:0 !important;padding-bottom:0 !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageGroupBlockOuter{padding-top:9px !important;padding-bottom:9px !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnBoxedTextContentColumn{padding-right:18px !important;padding-left:18px !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageCardLeftImageContent, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnImageCardRightImageContent{padding-right:18px !important;padding-bottom:0 !important;padding-left:18px !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcpreview-image-uploader{display:none !important;width:100% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 h1{font-size:22px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 h2{font-size:20px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 h3{font-size:18px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 h4{font-size:16px !important;line-height:150% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnBoxedTextContentContainer .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 .yiv0237014684mcnBoxedTextContentContainer .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p{font-size:14px !important;line-height:150% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templatePreheader{display:block !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templatePreheader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templatePreheader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p{font-size:12px !important;line-height:150% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateHeader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateHeader .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p{font-size:16px !important;line-height:150% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateBody .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateBody .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p{font-size:14px !important;line-height:150% !important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateFooter .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent, #yiv0237014684 #yiv0237014684templateFooter .yiv0237014684mcnTextContent p{font-size:12px !important;line-height:150% !important;}} By Rev. Jessica Shine | | | | View this email in your browser | | | | | | | | | | | | | | I’m tired of giving to charities. | | | | | | | | | | Essay by Rev. Jess Shine March 16, 2023Let me say that again for the people in the back. I’m tired of giving money to charities. I’ve served the church in development and parish life for over 20 years. I don’t believe giving is wrong. The Bible tells us God loves a cheerful giver and infers that we can’t out give God. So why do I say I’m tired of giving to charities?You may have heard the story of a family from the rural countryside (I first heard a version of this story from financial planner Dave Ramsey). On special occasions, Mom cooks up a particular cut of meat. She cuts off the end and prepares it in her beloved skillet. The kids grow up learning this tradition, and eventually, a son moves out and starts his own family. On special occasions, he repeats his mom’s tradition. Brings home the same cut of meat, cuts off the end, and cooks it in his mom’s favorite cooking pan now inherited. One day his partner asks ‘why are you cutting off so much of that meat?’ The son replies, ’so it will fit in the pan.’ Confused his partner says ‘maybe we need to get a bigger pan?!’Maybe one reason I am tired of giving to charities is that many organizations struggle to dream of a bigger pan, a greater mission. Maybe it’s because they don’t have a clear vision or strategy to get there. Often, we view giving to charity as giving only the parts we don’t want. The piece we cut off and throw away. The old clothes we don’t want, the old cans of food we won’t eat, the household items we can’t sell. How often do we give and think, “they should be grateful?”Sometimes we give because we’re resigned to the fact that unless we give, we’ll have to deal with ‘those people’ in other ways. Like sleeping in our neighborhoods, or jogging through them. Maybe we give because we assume that everyone can pull themselves up by their bootstraps. But what if they have no boots, to begin with?Giving away something and then telling the recipient how to use it is like giving something with a closed fist. Nothing can flow in or out. Sometimes in progressive circles, we’re so good at ‘doing for’ that we objectify the very people we are giving ‘to’. This inhibits our shared experience of liberation and I’m tired of giving in those ways. The Reverend Dr. Yvonne Delk recently reflected on this phenomenon when speaking on the history of Afro-Christian Churches within the United Church of Christ. She shared how communities of color, specifically the Afro-Christian Connection, weren’t (and still often aren’t) included in the origin stories of the denomination because they were seen as a mission priority. People to ‘bring into’ rather than ‘co-create with’. This is also true of the Indigenous peoples and Latin liberation movements that influenced American congregationalism (and continue to do so in beautiful and life-giving ways).In other words, despite labeling ourselves progressive we protect historic missiology rather than examining our personal theology. We avoid asking why we have believed or continue to believe certain things that manifest in our liturgy, organizational structures, financial systems, and outreach. This keeps our siblings from true and full inclusion, from denominational origins until today. Church we need to tell our story with a bigger pan and include all our Siblings who are the Body of Believers!I’m tired of giving money to charities whose leadership doesn’t include the folks with whom there is a disparity. I’m tired of giving to charities that spend more money on the symptoms than addressing the root causes. I’m tired of giving to charities where the ‘power’ is held by a few who ‘know better’ or at least a few who remember how we used to do things in the good ole days.Maybe you’ve committed to being anti-racist or to being radically inclusive of all God’s Beloved. Thank you! And perhaps you were taught that when you saw someone drowning you jumped in the river to help them out, nothing wrong with that. Sometimes we give to save someone, or something, an institution perhaps, a church, a building. The Late Bishop Desmond Tutu said, “There comes a point where we need to stop just pulling people out of the river. We need to go upstream and find out why they’re falling in.”So what if there’s a better way to focus our giving and our mission? Better than our leftovers, our guilt, our savior-ism. What if there’s a bigger pan? What if there’s more to generosity than contorting our offerings into a small vision?Micah 6:8 often posted on banners and bulletins is part of a conversation where the prophet Micah is specifically speaking towards the city of Jerusalem. To prophesy its destruction and then restoration. But the destruction he foretold wasn’t brought on by an oppressive external enemy, it was an internal corruption of the people’s dishonesty and idolatry. Their vision was too small.According to Micah, the city of God was doomed because its beautification was financed by dishonest business practices, which impoverished the city's citizens. In chapters 6 and 7, God wasn’t angry because they wanted beautiful things. God was angry because of how they got beautiful things, namely the extortion of their siblings.Through Micah’s voice, it becomes clear that these people have lost their vision and have settled for a smaller pan. He asks the people, remember how God freed you from slavery in Egypt? You are enslaving people, your system is corrupt and your relationships are broken. Remember liberation is your story, it's where you’ve come from, he says to them.People who are liberated don’t enslave other people.In this passage, the people of God have become disconnected from each other, from the land, and Creator. How does God know they have become disconnected? Because they enslave each other rather than work cooperatively to build together. Because they justify the very financial practices that once entangled them. It’s easy to do that when we are disconnected from each other’s experiences.Micah is speaking from a broken heart. He speaks to his people knowing and feeling all the fears, all the worries, spoken and unspoken. He’s been awake in the middle of the night wrestling with his grief, anger, and disappointment. You’ve felt it too, haven’t you? During these years of pandemic and uprisings where we’ve become more and more aware of the needed changes in our financial and social systems.How might our generosity lean into liberation for All? Are we capable of giving more? Are we ready to give in more focused ways or to live on less than we earn? Liberation can be a guide for our generosity and a reminder to look beyond our church building for how the kin-dom of God is on the move. What does life begin to look like if liberation is the guide in how we share resources? Divine abundance? Enough for all? Joyful re-examination of our mission and the pan we’ve inherited to serve others?When we begin with liberation for all, we stay connected to ourselves, our bodies, our planet, our siblings, and our divine intuition. We know deeply why we are doing what we are doing. A space where I'm learning to listen to others and tend to the cacophony inside myself is with a cohort called Sacred Conversations to End Racism, led by the Rev. Dr. Velda Love. The monthly practice of reading, listening, and sharing is helping me shift the scarcity narrative I’ve inherited and love better through my living and giving. You can find more resources for your journey at jointhemovementucc.org.Liberation for all is the bigger pan, the bigger vision. Enough living and giving in to a small vision. I’m tired of giving to charities whose vision is anything less than Liberation for All.~ Rev. Jess Shine Read online here About the Author The Reverend Jess Shine, MDiv (they/she/elle) served most recently as Associate Minister at First Congregational UCC in Eugene, Oregon. Jess earned degrees in theology and divinity, but says, "I still haven't figured out how to walk on water.” In 2021, they completed the Privilege of Call process while serving at the national setting of the United Church of Christ. Jess was ordained to ministry by the Seventh-day Adventist Church and has continued offering spiritual care as a clergy member of The CHI Interfaith Community (based in Berkeley, CA). With over two decades of experience pastoring church communities, police officers, hospice patients and staff, teenagers, and as Community Minister of The Chaplaincy Institute, she brings a passion for people and a skill for communicating in transformative ways. Jess is a descendant of Mexican, Indian, and Northwestern European immigrants. Their spirituality began in childhood and continues through expansive relationships, reading, music, wine, travel, theological processing, sports, and food! Shine co-hosted a podcast on death and dying called “Done For” also available on iTunes, and Google. Shine has written for ProgressiveChristianity.org and Progressing Spirit, and serves as CHI Seminary Guest Faculty. Jess celebrates life with their wife, Deshna (an ordained interfaith chaplain), bonus daughter Kaila, and their four-legged friends. | | | | | | | | Question & Answer Q: By John What is the difference between religion and spirituality? A: By Rev. Dr. Matthew Fox Dear John,Thank you for your question. It seems especially pressing today since so many people, especially young people, are identifying as “spiritual but not religious.” What is behind this particular sign of our times? I hear you asking. The word “religion” today conjures up dogmas, doctrines, institutions, hierarchy, buildings, organized worship, rules, positions on topics of the day ranging from extreme right (“Christian nationalists” or “Opus Dei”) to a more thoughtful effort to discern how to apply values to complex moral issues. I think many people find these sociological and complex versions of religion to be a heavy weight to carry at this time in history when so much is shifting beneath our feet. We are moving from the age of Pisces (symbolizing dualism by two fish swimming in the opposite directions) to the age of Aquarius, which is much more mystically based, water being a sign of depth and panentheism (fish in the water and water in the fish, God in the water and the water in God) and therefore spirituality. Think of John of the Cross: “Launch out into the deep.” In a nutshell, spirituality is our experience of the Divine. Religion and spirituality do not have to be at odds. But in a time of cultural upheaval that we are living through, many see them as such. Thomas Aquinas actually defines religion this way: As a habit of “supreme thankfulness or gratitude.” This definition of religion avoids much of the sociological burdens named above. His definition zeroes in on spirituality, for the first step in spirituality is the awe, wonder, beauty and delight of existence itself—and “supreme thankfulness or gratitude” follows from that. As Heschel says, “awe precedes faith.” These experiences are what the mystics call the Via Positiva. Gratitude for existence itself. “Isness is God,” says Meister Eckhart. Spirituality is about living our lives from a deep place. A place of Yes (William James called mysticism the “Yes” faculty). And No—the prophetic work that Rabbi Heschel calls “interfering” with injustice. Both taken together are a root or radical response to life which is my definition of what prayer is all about. How does one renew religion when it has gone sour or irrelevant, boring or insipid? Carl Jung says, “only the mystics bring what is creative to religion itself.” One looks more deeply into the depths of one’s soul, what St. Paul and Meister Eckhart call the “inner person” or the “new self” as distinct from the “old self.” In today’s parlance, the “true self,” as distinct from the “false self.” Heschel says that “there lies in the recesses of every existence a prophet.”. How get to those recesses? The Via Positiva names the depths of joy and gratitude. The Via Negativa names the depths of silence and letting go, suffering, grief, and the dark night of the soul. The Via Creativa names our giving birth from our depths. And the Via Transformativa names the depths of justice-making, compassion, healing and celebration. When religion is healthy, it is assisting us to travel this deep spiritual journey. When it is enfeebled, it takes love (mystics are lovers) as expressed in these four paths of creation spirituality to bring the real meaning of religion back. All forms evolve. Of course. That is what evolution means, the living, dying and rebirth of forms. Religion, like all else, is subject to evolution. ~ Rev. Dr. Matthew Fox Read and share online here About the Author Rev. Dr. Matthew Fox holds a doctorate in spirituality from the Institut Catholique de Paris and has authored 40 books on spirituality and contemporary culture that have been translated into 78 languages. Fox has devoted 45 years to developing and teaching the tradition of Creation Spirituality and in doing so has reinvented forms of education and worship (called The Cosmic Mass). His work is inclusive of today’s science and world spiritual traditions and has awakened millions to the much-neglected earth-based mystical tradition of the West. Among his books are A Way To God: Thomas Merton's Creation Spirituality Journey; Meister Eckhart: A Mystic-Warrior For Our Times; Hildegard of Bingen: A Saint for Our Times; Order of the Sacred Earth; The Tao of Thomas Aquinas: Fierce Wisdom for Hard Times; and Julian of Norwich: Wisdom in a Time of Pandemic – And Beyond; Original Blessing; The Coming of the Cosmic Christ; A Spirituality Named Compassion; Matthew Fox: Essential Writings on Creation Spirituality. To encourage a passionate response to the news of climate change advancing so rapidly, Fox started DailyMeditationswithMatthewFox.org | | | | | | | | Please continue to send us your feedback… we are listening. We aim to give voice to many different perspectives that are relevant and inspiring along this spiritually progressing path. We are not here to tell you what to believe or how to act. We are here to support your journey, to share and learn together.Thank you for being a part of this community - join us on Facebook! | | | | | | | | | | | | | | An Easy Way To Make a BIG Difference I bet you, like me, get more than a bit overwhelmed with all the injustices in the world. We want to do something about it – and, more times than not, we try to. It's just that there are so many things we'd like to help make better. It's easy to get frustrated and feel like what you are doing isn't enough – at least, I feel that way, at times. Being that many of these injustices come from folks calling themselves Christians, some of the best tools we have for countering them are hearts of compassion and theological education based on the hermeneutic of love. It just so happens that those are some of our highest values here at ProgressiveChristianity.org and we are passionate about giving others the tools to promote them. That's where you can easily make a BIG difference. We count on donations from folks like you to keep our vital theological and spiritual tools available. A simple donation from you can help make a big difference to someone else and even to the world. Please consider being a part of helping make the world a better place, make a donation today. Or, consider a monthly gift to help in our ongoing efforts. Thank you, you are why we are here. PEACE! Rev. Dr. Mark Sandlin President and Co-Exec. Director | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Don't miss the next Episode of PC.org's Executive Directors Mark and Caleb on: The Moonshine Jesus Show - every Monday at 4:30pm Eastern Time – watch live on Facebook,, YouTube, Twitter, Podbean | | | | | | | | | | | | What is Progressive Christianity?A Panel Discussion with the Board of DirectorsTake a few moments and listen to the Board of Directors of ProgressiveChristianity.org talk about the Progressive Christian Movement and what it’s going to look like in the future. READ ON ... | | | | | | | | | Bishop John Shelby Spong Revisited Part VII Matthew: The Shady Ladies of Matthew's Genealogy Essay by Bishop John Shelby Spong November 14, 2013The audience for which Matthew wrote was conversant with the Jewish Scriptures, so when he mentions Tamar in the genealogy, they would know her story. The Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) was read in its entirety in the traditional synagogues on the Sabbaths of a single year. The 38th chapter of Genesis, where Tamar’s story is told would thus be read on the sixth or seventh Sabbath following the beginning of the liturgical cycle in the month of Nisan. Tamar’s story interrupted the familiar story of Joseph, so it stood out in clear relief. Listen now to her story. Judah, the son of Jacob, had married the daughter of a Canaanite man named Shua and by her he had three sons, Er, Onan and Shelah. While in the land of Chezib, Judah took for Er, his oldest son, a wife whose name was Tamar. She too was a Canaanite. Er, we are told in the Bible, was wicked and “God killed him.” So Tamar, in accordance with Jewish practice, was given to Onan, Er’s brother, to be his wife. Onan, however, did not want to raise up children to his deceased brother, so he practiced “coitus interruptus,” which has given us the word “Onanism.” This so displeased God, the Bible tells us, that God killed Onan also. Shelah was next in line to take Tamar as his wife, but he was only a small boy and by this time Tamar’s reputation for being responsible for the deaths of her first two husbands was fixed. Shelah, therefore, was not interested in or desirous of doing his culturally-assigned duty. So, Judah, Tamar’s father-in-law, sent Tamar back to her father’s house in disgrace. She was now considered “damaged goods,” one who would not bring a proper “bride price.” Judah did promise her that when Shelah came of age, she would be sent for and would become his wife. Time passed and this promise was soon forgotten. During those years of passage, however, Judah lost his wife and thus became a widower. After a period of mourning, Judah planned to go to the village of Timnah to have his sheep sheared. Tamar learned of this proposed trip and made her own plans. By this time, she was aware that Shelah, now grown, had not been offered to her as a husband. So Tamar took off her widow’s garments, put on a veil, wrapping herself in the garb of a prostitute and took a seat at the gate of her village. She knew that her village was on the road to Timnah and that Judah would have to pass her way. When Judah saw her, assuming that she was a prostitute, he went over to her to negotiate for her services offering her a lamb from his flock in payment for her “favors.” She demanded that he give her something of value to secure the promise; a pledge, if you will, until the lamb was delivered. She requested Judah’s signet ring, his cord and his staff. Judah gave them to her without debate and so the act was consummated. The next day Judah, acting, he felt, in good faith sent the lamb with one of his servants and asked Tamar to return his possessions. Tamar, however, could not be found. The people of her village denied that there ever was a prostitute who solicited business at their gate. So the lamb came back to Judah. To avoid embarrassment, he simply charged this experience off as a bad business deal. Three months later, the rumor came to Judah that Tamar his daughter-in-law was pregnant. He was angry and when this rumor was confirmed, he took action to have her put to death at the stake for the crime of “harlotry.” As Tamar was being brought forth to be burned, she sent a message and some gifts to Judah. “I am with child,” she said, “by the owner of this ring, this cord and this staff.” Judah recognized them as his own. He then repented of the way he had treated Tamar and took her into his home and harem. She produced twins and one of them, a boy named Perez, was in the line between Abraham and Jesus. By the standards of that day, sex with one’s father-in-law was considered to be incest and was condemned. In Matthew’s genealogy, however, the proclamation was made that the line that produced Jesus had flowed through the incest of Tamar. It was a strange and fascinating way to open the story of Jesus. The second woman mentioned in this genealogy was named Rahab. Her story is told in chapters two and six of the book of Joshua. She lived in Jericho, a Canaanite city, where she ran a brothel in the red light district. She was known in the book of Joshua as “Rahab the prostitute.” When Joshua sent spies into Jericho, they went to the house of Rahab, which was built into the walls that encircled the city. When rumors of the presence of these spies spread throughout the city, Rahab hid them from the searching authorities and when the gates of the city were locked after dark, she let them down outside the walls in a basket so that they could make their escape. She exacted a promise from them, however, that when the invasion of Jericho came, she and her family, all of whom would be gathered in her house, would be spared. It was done and they were saved. Rahab married a Jew named Salmon, perhaps he was a soldier in Joshua’s army, perhaps he was even one of the spies. In this story Matthew now says that the line that produced Jesus flowed through Rahab, the prostitute. The intrigue grows. The third woman in Matthew’s genealogy was Ruth the Moabite, whose story is told in the book that bears her name. A Jewish family, Elimelech, his wife Naomi, and their two sons Mahlon and Chilion, moved from Israel to Moab to escape a famine. Both sons soon married Moabite women, whose names were Orpah and Ruth. Then tragedy struck and the three men in this family died, leaving a Jewish widow and her two Moabite daughters-in-law. Naomi urged her two daughters in law to return to the protection of their fathers. Orpah did so, but Ruth refused and she and Nomi returned together to the land of the Jews. Two widowed, and thus single women, did not constitute a viable family in the Jewish world. There were no jobs for women; they lived by begging and gleaning. Gleaning was the process of allowing the poor to scour the fields after the harvest for enough grain to keep one alive. This is what Ruth did each day for Naomi. In this capacity, she came to the attention of the owner of the fields, a man named Boaz, who was a distant relative of Elimelech, Naomi’s deceased husband. Boaz protected Ruth from the male workers in the field and ordered them to leave some grain deliberately in the field for her to gather. He also saw to it that she got water. Naomi, pleased when she heard of these signs, planned her own course of action. A celebration was to be held when the crop was harvested. At this celebration there would be revelry and much wine. Naomi instructed Ruth to go to the celebration, bathed, perfumed and in her best dress. She was, however, not to make herself known to Boaz until “his heart was merry” with wine. Ruth agreed. When Boaz was well drunk, he lay down on the floor and went to sleep. Ruth put a pillow under his head and a blanket across his body and then climbed under the blanket with him. At midnight Boaz awoke and discovered Ruth under the blanket with him. “Who are you?” he asked, but Ruth having successfully seduced him, responded by saying, “Marry me,” for “you are next of kin.” Boaz protested that there was a kinsman closer than he. That kinsman, however, renounced that claim and Boaz married Ruth and they produced a son named Obed. The line that produced Jesus, said Matthew, now flowed through the seduction of Ruth. The mystery thickens. The final woman in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus was “the wife of Uriah, the Hittite.” Her story is told in II Samuel 11. Her name is Bathsheba. She came to King David’s attention while bathing on the rooftop of her home in what she thought was privacy. David’s rooftop towered above hers, however, and he could and did look down on the bathing scene. Smitten by her charms, he sent emissaries to her house inviting her to come to the king’s palace for a “tryst.” She came. Whether she had a right to refuse is not stated, but it was improbable. A few months after this tryst, Bathsheba sent word to King David that she was pregnant with his child. David demurred. She was a married woman, how did she know in this pre-DNA world that it was his child? Bathsheba responded that her husband was away serving in the king’s army and that he had been gone for months. You alone, she said, can be the father of this baby. David sought to give Uriah a furlough so that he could come home, enjoy his wife and thus become the “presumptive father.” The baby just came early, people would say. Uriah, however, refused to cooperate. So David had Uriah killed in battle and took Bathsheba into his harem. Matthew was now saying that the line that produced Jesus of Nazareth flowed through the adultery of Bathsheba. We cannot help but wonder why he is introducing his story of Jesus in this way. The incest of Tamar, the prostitution of Rahab, the seduction of Ruth and the adultery of Bathsheba were the experiences in his ancestry through which Jesus came to be born, as shown in the story of Matthew’s genealogy. All of these women were foreign, and by the standards of that day, all of these women were sexually compromised. This is the way Matthew introduces the story of Jesus’ birth. What was Matthew seeking to communicate? Surely he did not have birth records so that he could trace Jesus’ lineage with any degree of accuracy. Both Matthew and his reading audience would have known this. They would have been amused that anyone at any time would have thought of this family tree as literal history. We need to recognize, however, that Matthew is the first gospel writer to suggest that the birth of Jesus was supernatural and miraculous. He introduced this tradition into Christianity, but it was not until the ninth decade of the Christian era that it appeared. Simultaneously he suggested that the line that produced Jesus passed through incest, prostitution, seduction and adultery. When this series continues we will begin to unpack this dramatic introduction.~ John Shelby Spong | | | | | | | | Announcements Call to Covenant Join Rev. David Felten, co-creator of Living the Questions, for Module 3 of Living the Questions 2.0: Call to Covenant. Pastor David will be joined by Minnesota-based author, activist, and Zoom-wrangler Elizabeth Bayer.Participation in Module 1 or 2 is NOT required to participate in Module 3.Beginning Thursday, March 23rd 10 AM – 12 PM (Arizona time/MST), this online (ZOOM) webinar will continue on Thursdays through May 4th. READ ON ... | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

1 0

Adding Lynette to Listserves
by Sharon Fisher 16 Mar '23

16 Mar '23

Hello Timothy, I am sending this message to you requesting that *Lynette Ladysmith* be added to the ICA and OE listservs, which you administer. I am copying Lynette so that she can confirm that this is her wish. I have tried this before. I hope it works this time! Thanks, Sharon -- saf1220(a)gmail.com c: 503.807.7385

1 0

3/15/23 PHOTOS—B½ OF ARCHIVE PROJECT
by Frank Knutson 15 Mar '23

15 Mar '23

2 1

3/14/23 PHOTOS—B½ OF ARCHIVE PROJECT
by Frank Knutson 15 Mar '23

15 Mar '23

2 1

Women's History Month: "SISTERS"
by Ellie Stock 14 Mar '23

14 Mar '23

During this Women's History/Gift of Women's Month--In memory and in honor of and thanksgiving for women/sisters--known and unknown, past, present and those to come. Ellie :)elliestock@aol.com SISTERS To Earth's(Our/My) Sisters-- Who ~ bravelydance their daily paces, shineextraordinary light on ordinary places, where othersfaint or fear to tread, where laughteris born and tears are shed. Who ~steadfast, courageously with bolding care encourageunheard voices to dare, to share-- whose ownstruggling and vulnerability forge the way for newbeginnings and brighter days; Who ~spirited, passionate, seized by wonder endure timesand worlds so torn asunder-- Daughters ofthe Universe, Mothers of Earth, Midwives ofVision contracting to birth; Who ~ Friendof the forgotten, Madonna of the Trail league so thebeleaguered cannot fail-- builder ofcommunity, hub of life, Heart ofcompassion, mind of delight; Who ~ creative,innovative, for justice, for peace, no shrinkingviolet: advocate for the least-- doormat fornone, servant to All, risking,responding to Mystery's Call; Who ~ teacher,mentor, pioneer and guide to childrenwho trust and adults who confide-- focus andframe Reality's Face, girded withhumor, gratitude and grace; Who ~ strongin weakness, discerning need, choose toembrace the necessary deed-- unknowing,uncertain where that path leads, release giftsof healing, hope and possibility; Who ~ relentless,persistent, not seeking fame, throughweariness or suffering, not desiring fortune's claim, charm anddisarm obstacles' wedge, chiseling,expanding evolutionary edge. Child ofsisters past, Grandmother of sisters to come, Linkincredible sacrifice, bequeath unconditional love-- Wisdom of thestewing Cosmos, gentleness of the cooing dove, Incarnation,protector, celebrant of Creation's Covenant. To Earth'sSisters (Our/My) Sisters, Exemplars ofMystery-- Thanks be... Creationcelebrates You as you BE withBEING itself in history. Namaste Ho ejhs

1 0

3/13/23 PHOTOS—B½ OF ARCHIVE PROJECT
by Frank Knutson 13 Mar '23

13 Mar '23

1 0