- OE - lists.wedgeblade.net

Re: [Oe List ...] Grand Design continues
by Nancy Lanphear 23 May '12

23 May '12

Dear Friends of our Spirit Circle, The attachment is of some writings that Fred did in the last years of his life. It seemed that the portions I have chosen are particularly relevant to the other offerings of the topic of Grand Design. Enjoy! In love, Nancy

1 0

FYI - Andrew Cohen and Ken Wilber
by Beret Griffith 20 May '12

20 May '12

For anyone interested in Andrew Cohen/Ken Wilber conversations. >From the site: Uniting Cohen's pragmatic experience as a teacher of enlightenment with Wilber's extensive theoretical knowledge, the Guru & Pandit series offers a unique synthesis of theory and practice. A FREE Audio Webcast Series Featuring Andrew Cohen and Ken Wilber June 2nd . August 4th . October 6th . December 21st http://webprod.evolutionaryenlightenment.com/calls/static/guru-pandit.html Beret Griffith

1 0

hfgreenenc has sent you a link from nybooks.com
by web＠nybooks.com 18 May '12

18 May '12

hfgreenenc has sent you an item from nybooks.com. The item hfgreenenc would like you to see is entitled Bullying the Nuns. You can view it using the following link: <http://www.nybooks.com/shared/0ab402d72e5fdc414a376a27b7fdedf5> We hope you enjoy your content from nybooks.com. Sincerely, The New York Review of Books http://www.nybooks.com/ ------------------ If you enjoy this article, you may be interested in receiving one of the Review's free email newsletters: http://www.nybooks.com/newsletters/ You can also keep up to date with our RSS feeds: http://www.nybooks.com/rss/ Find us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/nybooks Find us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/nybooks This message was sent to you using the "email to a friend" feature on http://www.nybooks.com.

1 0

Awakening the Dreamer: ICA 50 event
by Ellie Stock 18 May '12

18 May '12

Hi folks, Greetings from St. Louis! We're hosting an Awakening the Dreamer, Changing the Dream Symposium in our community which will also be one of the 50 ICA events. If anyone is in or near the area, you are invited to come! Saturday, May 19, 8:30am-12noon St Stephen's Episcopal Church 33 N. Clay Ferguson, MO 63135 Over to the Ferguson Brew House for a celebration lunch afterwards. Please see attached flyer. Carleton and Ellie Stock elliestock(a)aol.com (314) 521-8418

2 2

5/17/12, Spong: Conflicting Emotion: Pride in the President, Shame at the Response of Many Church Leaders
by Ellie Stock 17 May '12

17 May '12

HOMEPAGE MY PROFILE ESSAY ARCHIVE MESSAGE BOARDS CALENDAR Conflicting Emotion: Pride in the President, Shame at the Response of Many Church Leaders When the President of the United States, announced his support for gay marriage, the political landscape began to roil and I was filled with two quite opposite sets of emotions. First, there were the positive feelings. There was enormous joy when I thought of what this would mean to close friends of mine who have worked so hard, waited so patiently and risked so much to help bring this day about. I could hear their names and see their faces parading through my mind: Elizabeth and Barbara, Louie and Ernest, Melissa and Fran, James and Mark, Cynthia and Rebecca, Michael and William, just to name a few. They dared to confront both their church and society by living out their love with an integrity that was awe-inspiring. I am thankful they could see this day and grateful for their witness that moved me and others beyond our cultural homophobia into a new sense of what humanity means. My second positive emotion was an intense sense of pride both in my nation and its elected chief executive. Here was a man who had known the lash of prejudice in his childhood and who still had decided that he could work within the system, not outside it, to bring about change. He held high the dream and the promise of America as a land in which people are to be judged neither by the color of their skin nor their sexual orientation, but by the quality of their character. In a nation politically divided and dealing with vast levels of fear and negativity it was a risky decision. Yet, President Obama chose to risk his presidency on this issue. He did not come to his decision quickly or easily. Many elements and many people pushed him in both directions, but he made the decision positively without equivocation and he shared elements of his personal decision making processes, and something of the pain that leaders face when leadership is required. To duck or waffle is easy; to have resolute courage is hard. My next positive emotion was amusement as I watched the pundits spin the story to justify their points of view. The liberals were full of praise, but many of them could not resist the exhibitionism that seems to mark those who have never stood where the President stands and who will pay no price for his decision. They chided the President for taking so long to reach his conclusion, barely concealing that congratulatory self-righteousness of the especially enlightened. Righteousness is sometimes hard to tolerate gracefully in public places. The conservatives on the other hand were revelatory more than anything else. Sean Hannity and many of his friends at Fox News dismissed this decision as “pure politics.” It would loosen the coffers of Hollywood money, they said, and bring new young voters into the political process. The revealing thing here was that the conservatives interpreted this decision as a political plus. Having used homosexuality as a wedge issue in the campaigns of 2000 and 2004 to their advantage, they now seem to be admitting that the majority is no longer on their side. More amusement came from those commentators who appear to identify marriage only with sex. Senator Mitch McConnell falls into this category, but Bill O’Reilly, again of Fox News, was the star of this point of view. He likened the President’s decision to “legalizing sex with turtles.” It was a cruelly inappropriate analogy. To put it crudely, if Mr. O’Reilly wants to have sex with a turtle there is no law that would prohibit him from doing so. Sex and marriage do indeed overlap, but they are certainly not identical. Marriage is a relationship of love, trust and caring, a relationship in which at best both partners are assisted into wholeness, making each other more capable of living, loving and being. Sex is a function of the human body that can be practiced outside of a loving relationship, but when it is no life is expanded, no love and worth are communicated and no one becomes more whole. Perhaps Mr. O’Reilly has not noticed that this fight has not been about turtles, but about human beings who want their love for another human being to be lived out in a relationship of exclusiveness and ultimate commitment. My amusement is heightened when I listen to the irrationality of those whose arguments are designed to keep their prejudices from looking silly. When gay and lesbian people seek to be included inside the experience and legal protection of marriage, how is it possible to claim that this will destroy marriage? Abuse, infidelity and divorce destroy marriage, loving gay couples do not. When people are justifying a dying prejudice, however, we probably should not expect rational arguments, for prejudice is sustained only in irrationality. There was, however, another set of emotions that enveloped me as this historic announcement was made. “Shame” is the word that best describes this side of the equation. My sense of shame was directed primarily toward those religious voices, predominantly Christian, that rushed into public with negative responses. First, there was Billy Graham, a noble man in many ways, who is now in his 90’s and not well. He was followed by his son, Franklin, whose only claim to fame is that he is Billy’s son. Both issued statements that this decision by the President was in “direct opposition to the Bible.” That is a tired, threadbare argument. It was used to support the divine right of kings and to oppose the adoption of Magna Carta in 1215. It was used against freeing America’s slave population and later against the dismantling of segregation. It was used against the movement for equality for women. It is now used against justice for homosexuals. How arrogant to use the Bible to place God on the side of one’s prejudice! No one, not even the fundamentalists, really takes the Bible literally. If they did they would seek to pass laws that would make being homosexual a capital offense for which execution would be required. That is biblical. Execution is also called for in the Bible for willfully disobedient children, for those who worship a false god and for those who commit adultery. With that standard we could keep the electric chairs working overtime. Before one seeks to impose a literal Bible on our society one might actually want to read this sacred text. Roman Catholic leaders in New York and Milwaukee trotted out their “homosexuals are deviant” argument and reasserted that monogamous marriage between one man and one woman was a “God-given pattern.” They appear not to know about the polygamy so prevalent in the Bible nor its patriarchal abuse. A Texas Baptist preacher was shown on a late night comedy talk show claiming that the President’s decision went against the teachings of Jesus. Perhaps someone should tell this preacher that there is not one word about homosexuality in any of the four gospels. No one ever recorded Jesus mentioning the subject. Next, an African-American bishop appeared on a cable news network to perfume his homophobia with a wealth of words about his “deep concern” for children. He feared that their educations and values would be altered and that future generations would be adversely affected. He seemed not to realize that each of these arguments was once used to sustain segregation. How quickly yesterday’s victims can become tomorrow’s victimizers. Probably the most embarrassing misuse of Christianity came from Tony Perkins, a graduate of Jerry Falwell’s College, who is now president of the Family Research Center, an offshoot of James Dodson’ Focus on the Family movement. Perkins, being interviewed by Chris Matthews on MSNBC, made statements designed to show that good parents can keep their children from becoming gay, as he claimed that he and his wife had done, a point of view that is not held by any reputable scientific or medical authority. When his obvious ignorance was challenged he kept modifying his words in an effort to remove the offense. It cannot, however, be removed. Ignorance is ignorance. Homosexuality cannot be created by improper parenting, nor can it be changed or “cured” by prayer and therapy and all those organizations identified with fundamentalist Christian bodies, that claim to do so, are fraudulent and should be prosecuted for attempting to practice medicine without a license. The attitude of uninformed Christian people on this subject and the unwillingness of the Christian Church and most of its leaders to stand up for justice and against the oppression of gay people has been and remains the source of my deepest shame as a Christian. It was a political leader, we need to note, not the Pope nor an Archbishop nor a spiritual leader who took the proper stand on this great moral issue of our time. This day brought me personally an enormous sense of fulfillment. I recall that in 1986 the Diocese of the Episcopal Church that I was privileged to serve passed a report calling upon my church to recognize and to bless the sacred commitments of our gay and lesbian members. I remember that in 1989 with the support of that diocese I ordained the first gay man who lived openly with his partner. Those days were not easy and I still feel both the wounds that were inflicted on me by fearful ecclesiastical leaders and the 16 death threats that I received, all from “Bible-quoting” Christians. Yet when I retired our 35 diocesan, openly gay and lesbian clergy were among the finest priests I have ever known. In 2003 my church ordained its first openly gay bishop. The victory was worth the struggle and now the President of the United States has lent his voice to this cause. The Battle has been won. Rejoice! ~John Shelby Spong Read the essay online here. Bishop Spong's Summer Session at the Pacific School of Religion! Re-Claiming the Bible in a Post-Christian World Instructor: John Shelby Spong Dates and Times: One week: July 16-20, 9am - 1pm Description: Can the Bible, written 2000-3000 years ago, speak in any meaningful way to the 21st century? If it cannot, then is Christianity at an end? If it can, will Christianity look anything like what we have known in the past? Since creeds and doctrines are all constructed on the basis of what was believed to be "Biblical Truth," can any of the current formularies stand? Since liturgy is based on biblical definitions of sin, salvation and God, none of which make much sense to 21st century people, can Christianity tolerate the revolution that it faces? This class will be taught by one who has been a priest and bishop for 56 years with one foot in the institutional church and the other in the academic world of new insights. It is specifically designed for clergy and questing lay people. Course Credits & Cost: 1.5 credits - $990; audit - $495; 2.0 CEUs - $350 Course Number: BS-2117 (credit); BS-0003 (CEUs) Required Text: John Shelby Spong, Re-Claiming the Bible for a Non-Religious World, 2011 HarperCollins, San Francisco. Purchase here. Syllabus: Re-Claiming the Bible in a Post-Christian World Register Question & Answer Fran from Yachats, Oregon, asks: Question: How do you get around the common requirement of calling yourself a Christian unless you believe that Jesus was resurrected from the dead? If you don’t believe that why don’t you call yourself a Unitarian-Universalist? Answer: Dear Fran, Your question makes so many presuppositions that I cannot respond to it adequately without addressing and unloading those presuppositions. First, I do agree that the resurrection of Jesus is an essential ingredient for the Christian faith and for an individual to make the Christian claim. I have written two books on the Resurrection. The last of which was entitled Resurrection: Myth or Reality? I believe it is both. You seem to be asserting that resurrection means believing that the death process was reversed in some physical way in the life of Jesus and that he was resuscitated to life in this world after he died in some kind of physiological way. That is a typical understanding of those who would be called fundamentalist Protestants or conservative Catholics. That point of view, however, reveals enormous biblical ignorance and confuses the resurrection experience with a late first century explanation of that experience that has become literalized in traditional Christian circles. A study of the New Testament will reveal that Paul saw the resurrection of Jesus as Jesus having been raised into the meaning and life of God, out of which he appeared in some visionary way to certain chosen witnesses. To say it differently, resurrection for Paul was not physical resurrection back into the life of this world, but was much more like the ascension, even though the ascension itself came to be literalized by the 10th decade and began to be thought of as a physical rising into the sky by Jesus. The first gospel, Mark, written in the 8th decade, includes in its pages no account of the risen Jesus appearing to anyone. In the second gospel, Matthew, written in the 9th decade, there is the first hint that resurrection might be a physical thing, but that occurs in a discredited narrative where Matthew changes Mark’s original story line where in Mark there was no hint of physicality. Seeing Resurrection as physical resuscitation is thus the primary addition first in Luke, who wrote in the latter years of the 9th decade or perhaps even in the early years of the 10th decade, and then in John, who wrote at the end of the 10th decade. Affirming the reality of the resurrection experience is quite different from affirming a late first century explanation and interpretation of the resurrection. So your assertion that I do not believe in the Resurrection is simply wrong. Your other suggestion that I should belong in the Unitarian Universalist tradition since, in your opinion, they do not believe in the resurrection, is also misleading. I have great admiration for the Unitarian-Universalist tradition. They bring an intellectual openness to theological discussions that I admire. Their commitment to social justice seems to me to be the deepest of any religious tradition. So, if that comment was meant to be derogatory, it missed its mark. I can discuss the resurrection more easily with Unitarians that I can with traditionalists and once we get past resuscitation, the conversation explores resurrection easily. So, let me sum up by saying I see in Jesus one who broke every boundary of human possibility, including the boundary of death. I do not believe that what the disciples of Jesus called resurrection has anything to do with the resuscitation of a deceased body. So I not only believe in the resurrection, but I claim my identity as a Christian with enthusiasm. I hope what this answer does for you is to make you aware that simplistic religious clichés about profound attempts to explore the realm of the spirit are expressions of inadequate understanding and are therefore a very poor reason to be religiously judgmental. ~John Shelby Spong Announcements Read what Bishop Spong has to say about A Joyful Path Progressive Christian Spiritual Curriculum for Young Hearts and Minds: "The great need in the Christian church is for a Sunday school curriculum for children that does not equate faith with having a pre-modern mind. The Center for Progressive Christianity has produced just that. Teachers can now teach children in Sunday school without crossing their fingers. I endorse it wholeheartedly." Subscribers, please remember that your subscription is automatically renewed. You can unsubscribe at any time. Simply login to access your profile page and cancel your account. Login to be able to comment directly on the website. Join in the discussion! Interested in staying informed of the latest updates to ProgressiveChristianity.org? Click here to sign up for our free monthly e-Bulletin, which has articles, reviews, books, events, and more. Look for Bishop Spong on Facebook and LIKE the Facebook page for ProgressiveChristianity.org! You can also follow Bishop Spong on Twitter. Thank you for taking this journey with us! Any questions or concerns, please contact us at support(a)johnshelbyspong.com or 503-236-3545. forward to a friend Copyright © 2012 ProgressiveChristianity.org, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you have a membership at our website. Our mailing address is: ProgressiveChristianity.org 4916 Pt Fosdick Dr, NW #148 Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Add us to your address book

1 0

ICA 50th Celebration in Minnesota
by E B 12 May '12

12 May '12

Dear Friends and Colleagues, ICA 50th Anniversary Invitation WHAT: ICA 50th Anniversary Invitation WHERE: Sue and Stefan Laxdal’s home on Medicine Lake a bit west of Minneapolis WHEN: Saturday, June 16, 2012 from 9:00 am – 3 pm You are invited to spend time with friends and colleagues, both old and new, to celebrate 50 Years of The Institute of Cultural Affairs caring for the world. We will share what we’ve been up to; create pieces of an artform being given life by Gina Alicea an artist from Chicago; participate in charting a new book (if you want to); talk some more and feast with a pot luck lunch. Come any time between 9 am and 3 pm. The book: Bending History: Volume II Societal Reformulation - toward a New Social Vehicle, John L. Epps, General Editor. The book is available in paperback for $19.95 plus shipping from Resurgence Publishing http://resurgencepublishing.com/book_summaries.htm#BH_Vol_II) You can read reviews and comments. It is also available at Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/Bending-History-Societal-Reformulation-toward-Vehicle… Volume II is a stand-alone book and it is not essential to have read Volume 1. As the ICA looks forward to the next 50 years of aiding social change, this book summarizes some of the key insights behind spirit, intellectual and social methods developed over the years. A couple of comments: Eunice Shankland, Consultant-trainer for the United Nations: “The book is a powerful guide that will broaden our perspectives, deepen our spirit resolve and equip us in our service.” Shankland & Associates, LLC; Past Chair of the International Association of Facilitators, USA. Maureen Jenkins, Author and Leadership Skills Trainer: “In Bending History Volume II, John Epps once again seeks to bring the rich legacy of Joseph Wesley Mathews to the attention of those who are concerned that social change is grounded in a well-reflected spirituality. The book provides a much needed reminder of the thinking out of which the unique ICA approach to managing change emerged.” Please let us know if you can come. For more info contact: Beret Griffith beretgriffith(a)charter.net Cheryl Kartes Kartes(a)aol.com Elsa Batica elsa.batica(a)gmail.com Linda Alton lindaalton(a)gmail.com Sue Laxdal Sue.Laxdal(a)igc.org

1 0

5/10/12, Spong: A Meditation on the Meaning of a Brief Life
by Ellie Stock 10 May '12

10 May '12

HOMEPAGE MY PROFILE ESSAY ARCHIVE MESSAGE BOARDS CALENDAR A Meditation on the Meaning of a Brief Life They were a very happy young couple. Both the wife and the husband were successful professionally. They had worked hard to achieve this success, postponing much of what young adults think of as fun in order to pursue their goals. They were in their early thirties when they met, fell in love and decided to get married. Their marriage was an occasion of great joy for themselves and for both of their families. The wedding brought together customs old and new, uniting two distinct cultural histories into one life-giving and flowing stream. They settled into their new home and began to build their own traditions. They wanted a family and after a year or so were delighted to learn that they were expecting a baby. Both families rejoiced in this news and it seemed that their happiness broke any boundaries that they had known before. Inspired by their joy they seemed to soar through the days. A month or so later to their amazement and heightened pleasure, they learned that they were expecting twins. With the realization that they had started their family a little bit later than usual, they were overjoyed. When all of their friends warned them about sleepless nights, double barreled diapers and no time for themselves, it fazed them not one bit so ecstatic was their anticipation. All went well for about five months and then complications arose. The young mother began to dilate prematurely and threatened to go into labor. The lives of these babies were barely on the edge of viability outside the womb. Modern medicine that is so amazing sprang into action. The expectant mother was taken to the hospital and placed under twenty-four hour observation. If necessary, she would spend the rest of her pregnancy in the hospital. Every day she got through in that setting without further complications was a day that made the lives of these twins more hopeful. Two weeks later, however, the mother’s body was attacked by e coli bacteria while she was in the hospital. The medical team began to treat this infection with the massive drugs at their disposal, but it soon became clear that a caesarian-section would be required to save the babies from both the virus and the drugs. The c-section was performed. Only one of the twins made it through that transition. The boy, Julian Edward was the name they had chosen for him, lived but a moment. The girl, Chloe Emma was her name, was on the borderline, but she seemed to have that tiny edge that pushed her to the side of life. She is still living and the hopes and expectations are that after time in the neo-natal unit of this hospital, she will go home to her parents vital and healthy. The mother also finally passed the crisis point and she too will recover fully, but the emotional price that she and her husband were called on to pay was very high. It was a price that their extended families also had to pay. No one who ever loves another is immune to the pain to which that love makes us vulnerable. As this situation unfolded, I learned yet again something of the mystery of life as well as something of its terror. If someone had told this young couple a year ago that they would be the parents of a precious and happy baby girl, they would have been thrilled. They would have seen that as the fulfillment of their dreams. Now, however, their joy has been compromised by grief. Joy at the birth and life of their daughter, grief at the death of their son, these conflicting emotions – feelings both bitter and sweet – engulfed them simultaneously. Questions about life’s strange twists raged in their minds as well as in the minds of those of us who love them. The necessity of absorbing pain over which one has no control was real, hopes that ran so high were dashed so cruelly and a haunting wonder surrounded them. They needed to mourn their lost boy, but what is the form that their proper grief can take? Can one ascribe purpose to a life that lived so very briefly? Is there any redemptive meaning that can be attributed to the death of a premature baby? In generations past, comfort came through the suggestion that the will of God must in some way have been served by this tragedy. The religious assumptions of that age were clear. God had to be in control of this world. No tragedy would have occurred without purpose or if God had not somehow willed it. God must have a plan, we said, into which this little lad fitted. If life were ruled by nothing other than chance or blind fate, then the anxieties we would have to face in the task of living would simply be too difficult and too debilitating for us to manage emotionally. Those comforting convictions of an earlier time, however, have not endured. We have been forced to note time after time that history is replete with illustrations that reveal that God is apparently not in charge, for things do not always turn out well and good does not always prevail. Elie Wiesel came to that conclusion when he lived through and survived the Holocaust, being the only member of his family to do so. The poor of the city of New Orleans came to that conclusion when they had to endure the fury of Hurricane Katrina. The people of Haiti came to that conclusion when the tectonic plates beneath the island of Hispaniola shifted, creating an earthquake in which over 200,000 people perished. Trayvon Martin’s family had to come to that conclusion as he became yet another victim of an all too familiar pattern of a deep-seated and blind racism. All of us face this same reality every time disease strikes; every time an innocent child dies or is killed; every time irrational anger on someone else’s part ends the life of another, whose only fault was to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. No one can deny life’s dark and painful side. Nor can we today cover it over with the simple and pious rhetoric of the past. Our questions are rooted in life not in the religious convictions of the previous era. How are we to observe or honor a life that only lives for a moment? Should grieving parents and grandparents note the reality of that life by giving that baby a name? Should a memorial or funeral service be planned to honor the tiny life that was there? Would that make life easier for the parents, the grandparents or even for the way they will all relate to the surviving daughter? Would those gestures be anything more than an act of sentimental and hopeful delusion? This particular experience caused me to think about these questions and to come to these conclusions. I am convinced that all life, no matter how brief, is of value. I do not want to spend my time trying to explain why bad things happen to good people or by trying to assess guilt and attempting to find someone or something to blame for life’s tragedies. I have no interest in turning to yesterday’s religious certainty and seeking comfort by assigning this tragedy to the “enigmatic will of God.” Instead I find that I yearn to engage this family in a new kind of discussion by asking them to think with me about a new set of questions. How was your life touched by this child who did not make it? Did anticipating this baby’s birth expand your consciousness and enhance your life? Did it increase in you a capacity to love and to know the joy of anticipation? Was there any role this now-deceased infant played in strengthening the love that holds a marriage together? Did this infant boy serve to deepen the bonds of affection that create the extended family? Is it possible that the survival of the infant girl was made possible by the death of the infant boy? Did he absorb the e coli bacteria and thus protect his twin sister from the fate that he experienced? Was the noblest of all human experiences operating here, the principle of sacrifice: one dies so that another might live? If any of these questions can be answered with a “yes” then I think we should call this boy by the name his parents had chosen for him, to remember him, to give thanks for him and to acknowledge that, while his time on this earth was short, it was not insignificant. This is also why I believe that we should mark the passing of this brief life with some kind of liturgical event in which he is remembered, his remaining effects placed into the ground or in some appropriate place with care, ceremony and sensitivity. He did live. He affected positively those who still live. He made a contribution to life that needs to be acknowledged and for which thanksgiving needs to be expressed. Life at any level is a miracle. Only those who are able to love and to love self-consciously and deeply can feel the trauma of loss, of separation. So anyone who participates in life, if only for a moment, that one still lives, still contributes and still needs to be acknowledged. Every life no matter how he or she lives is still an expression of the Source of Life. Every life is, therefore, holy because the Source of Life is holy. It is that holiness that we acknowledge when we come together in grief and with heavy hearts to commit one, who lived only momentarily, to the Source of life, which he surely embodied. So, yes, let us treat this tiny life as we treat every life. Let us hear in worship the words, “dust thou art and to dust thou shalt return.” Let us give thanks for the meaning that this life has brought and commend this life to the Source of Life. It is our self-consciousness that allows us to be grateful, to commune with and even to worship, that which makes us alive even if for but a moment. ~John Shelby Spong Read the essay online here. John Shelby Spong Lectureship 2012: James Carroll at St. Peter's on May 17 Noted author, historian and journalist, James Carroll, will speak at St. Peter’s Morristown on Thursday May 17 at 7:30pm in the evening. Mr. Carroll, is the Scholar-in-Residence at Suffolk University, holder of the 2011 Alonzo L. McDonald Family Chair at Emory University, and a columnist for the Boston Globe. He is author of ten novels and six works of non-fiction, including “Jerusalem, Jerusalem: How the Ancient City Ignited Our Modern World” (2011). Born in Chicago in 1943, Carroll attended Georgetown University before entering the seminary to train for the Catholic priesthood. He received BA and MA degrees from St. Paul’s College, the Paulist Fathers’ seminary in Washington, and was ordained to the Catholic priesthood in 1969. Carroll served as Catholic Chaplain at Boston University from 1969 to 1974, then left the priesthood to become a writer. Carroll's works include the National Book Award winning "An American Requiem"; the New York Times bestselling "Constantine's Sword", now an acclaimed documentary; "House of War", which won the first PEN-Galbraith Award; and "Practicing Catholic". His most recent book is "Jerusalem, Jerusalem: How the Ancient City Ignited Our Modern World", which was named a 2011 Best Book by Publishers Weekly. Mr. Carroll lectures widely, both in the United States and abroad. Tickets are $15.00 (reduced price!) and can be purchased in advance or at the door. Click here for tickets and registration. Question & Answer Matt, from area code 205, writes: Question: What is your view on the “Great Commission” for Christians? Answer: Dear Matt, The so-called “Great Commission” is recorded only in Matthew’s gospel (28:16-20) and is the first time anywhere in the gospel tradition that the risen Christ is said to have spoken any words. Matthew is the second gospel to be written (82-85 CE.). We need to note that in the first gospel, Mark (written in the early 70’s CE.), there is no narrative of the risen Christ ever appearing to anyone at any time and thus there is no opportunity for Jesus to be allowed to speak. According to the translation in the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, the words of the “Great Commission” are, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel.” What do these words mean? First, let me state what they do not mean. They are not a challenge to become missionaries in order to evangelize the world and thus to make converts of all people to the Christian religion. That is a dreadful misconception based on the imperialism of Christianity that developed after Christianity became the established religion of the empire in the Fourth century CE. When Matthew’s gospel was written, the followers of Jesus were still members of the synagogue. The Christian community did not separate itself from the synagogue until about the year 88 C.E. which would have been within a decade after Matthew’s gospel was written. What then do these words mean? This text is part of what I call Matthew’s “interpretive envelope.” Matthew was the most Jewish of all the gospel writers, yet he wanted to portray Jesus as the power that called people beyond all of their tribal identities and ethnic values. In his opening chapters Matthew uses the symbol of a star to proclaim the birth of Jesus. The uniqueness of a star is that its light is not bound to the territory of any single nation, but it shines all over the world and thus it can serve as a sign, a heavenly invitation to come to the light that the star announced. The wise men were symbolic of the human yearning to leave their divisions behind and to find human oneness in the God Jesus was thought to reveal. The wise men were Gentiles overcoming their fears and their prejudices by coming into the Jewish world in search of the light. Following that introduction Matthew then told the story of the life of this Jesus, who with consistency set aside all barriers of tribe, gender, race and even religion, all of which serve to separate people from one another. When the story of Jesus is complete, Matthew closes his envelope by having Jesus speak the words of the “Great Commission.” What Matthew’s Jesus was saying is that once you understand the meaning of Jesus, you have a new responsibility. You now must go into “all the world.” You must go to those you have described as unclean, unbaptized, uncircumcised, non-koshered, different or unworthy and you must proclaim to them the love of God that has no boundaries and that knows no limits. You do this by crossing all human boundaries, all human prejudices and by removing the sources of all human rejections. The “Great Commission” thus has nothing to do with converting the heathen. Thanks for your question, it makes it possible for readers to see deeply into the biblical story, that is, to see far beyond the level of understanding that a literal reading of the scriptures would ever provide. ~John Shelby Spong Announcements Read what Bishop Spong has to say about A Joyful Path Progressive Christian Spiritual Curriculum for Young Hearts and Minds: "The great need in the Christian church is for a Sunday school curriculum for children that does not equate faith with having a pre-modern mind. The Center for Progressive Christianity has produced just that. Teachers can now teach children in Sunday school without crossing their fingers. I endorse it wholeheartedly." Subscribers, please remember that your subscription is automatically renewed. You can unsubscribe at any time. Simply login to access your profile page and cancel your account. Login to be able to comment directly on the website. Join in the discussion! Interested in staying informed of the latest updates to ProgressiveChristianity.org? Click here to sign up for our free monthly e-Bulletin, which has articles, reviews, books, events, and more. Look for Bishop Spong on Facebook and LIKE the Facebook page for ProgressiveChristianity.org! You can also follow Bishop Spong on Twitter. Thank you for taking this journey with us! Any questions or concerns, please contact us at support(a)johnshelbyspong.com or 503-236-3545. forward to a friend Copyright © 2012 ProgressiveChristianity.org, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you have a membership at our website. Our mailing address is: ProgressiveChristianity.org 4916 Pt Fosdick Dr, NW #148 Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Add us to your address book

1 0

Gen. Conf. Analysis (From Salman)
by Tim Wegner 09 May '12

09 May '12

(I'm posting this for Bill Salmon) Colleagues: The following was sent to a friend and church member who is attending the United Methodist General Conference in Tampa, Florida. She is helping to staff the "Tabernacle Tent" representing the LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning) homosexual community; she lobbies the delegates about this topic. Saturday, she wrote about how tired she was and about a chance encounter in the prayer room during which she was driven to tears of tiredness. In this same email she recalled an incident in one of the legislative committees during which an African woman stood and cried out her frustration on any approval of the LGBTQ screaming that if passed the result would be the depopulation and end of the world. In a phrase, those at the General Conference are filled with fearfulness and deep angst. The following is my message to her. It is my message to you. We are living in "In-Between Times" in which we are experiencing the death knell of the Modern Worldview characterized by modern science, and the New Post-Modern Worldview of those so-wired after 1985. Please read on. Inner Peace, Bill PS:: When you find this is helpful, please send it out as needed. WES +++ +++ +++ Beverly, It is early Sunday morning, and I awakened to read your email about Saturday's work and your personal experience in the Prayer Room. Interesting. However, the women's screaming episode also caught my attention. In many ways it is silly, yet it has profound implications. Perhaps, your weariness and her angst have something in common. Bev, you are standing in one of the epi-centers of history, and the reason why is that we are living in a "end times" (not capitalized) very similar to the time surrounding Jesus and the Early Church, and then again between the 15th to the 17th Centuries. During these periods they experienced an "end times" associated with the collapse of the Early Church's societal model and the birth of the Scientific Method (Renaissance, Reformation, Industrialization and Urbanization i.e., the Modern Worldview). At this very moment the General Conference (GC) is experiencing the death knell of the Modern Worldview and the excitement at the birth of the Postmodern Worldview! The Death and New Birth of our Contemporary Worldviews: Notice two things. First, the previous two global changes took place over long extended periods of time: 1500 years between the Early Church and the Modern systems in the 15 to the 17th Centuries. Our Modern Worldview has been in the process for 600 years! The death knell of the Modern Worldview began in 1917 with Einstein and E=MC2, and we have lived on the cusp of the old and the birth of the new for just 100 years! In terms of global change, this is very quick. Add to this the rapid changes associated with the Baby-Boomers and then the establishment of Generations X-Y-Z that occurred in the last 25 years since 1985! The Global Breakdown: How do I know this is the case? Observe the global breakdown of our Economic, Political and Cultural systems! For the first time ever each and every member of this General Conference are experiencing the collapse of the Social Process!! Think for a moment about Global Economics and what is happening to the entire banking, business, service and resource-distribution and manufacturing systems. Think for a moment about what is happening to Global Politics. Think for a moment about our Global family systems: Educational policies, and the collapse of Global Religious symbols and stories. What this is telling us is that every delegate and observer at the GC are hurting! In particular, you are standing at the center of Global Christian Faith that is the last bastion of security in an insecure world, AND THIS IS RADICALLY BEING CALLED INTO QUESTION. Unfortunately, the majority of delegates and observers do not understand this context. People are scared shitless! They need to be hugged, and soothed and supported. Instead, they are greeted by signs and symbols and activities that represent the collapse. In your case, the collapse of our understanding of THE FAMILY and its new and more inclusive birth. On the other hand, you stand at the cusp of what was launched 100 years ago with Einstein. This is one auspicious time during which a new baby is born, a birth that could shape the next 500 years! Our task now is to rewrite the story of faith by pulling it through the metaphors and symbols of the Jesus Story; these are archetypal stories on which every global civilization finds meaning, each according to its metaphors. Are all of the stories the same--not at all, but they all have the same Ur-Texts. Christians name these texts as the Jesus story. The New Assignment: What does this mean for you at General Conference. Well, for one, get this context into the hands of as many people as possible, because this describes the angst at the heart of the proceedings. I plan to share this with as many others involved as possible. Second, instead of agitating, be a lover. Now you can reach out in sympathy to each and every hurting person. Work to offer them the hope for a new world instead of signs of the collapse. Our hope lies in the Love of God that reaches out to the hurting and frustrated of all persuasions. Get a ribbon that says, "No matter what happens now -- God will see us through." Yawl become lovers of those you see as the enemy. It seems to me that this is where you'll find Jesus. What do you think? Pastor Bill

1 0

Quote from Bonhoeffer
by George Holcombe 09 May '12

09 May '12

What was that quote from Bonhoeffer a few days ago about lost causes, or going down with the ship, something like that. I was trying to look it up and couldn't find it. George Holcombe 14900 Yellowleaf Tr. Austin, TX 78728 Mobile 512/252-2756 geowanda(a)earthlink.net Hope appeareth, but it is not your Hope—you do not have anything to do with it. It just appeareth. It comes as a stranger, as an alien—it just appeareth! You do not even know why you hope. How in the world could you hope when there is absolutely nothing to justify any hope? ~Joseph W. Mathews

1 0

Re: [Oe List ...] [Dialogue] Guernica & Conversation Roots & Shoots
by LAURELCG＠aol.com 07 May '12

07 May '12

Can no longer resist jumping into this stream. John's observation that this conversation method isn't "ours alone" is so right. My bilingual education mentor, Alma Flor Ada, whose mentor was Paulo Freire, called her version of the methodology Creative Education. Its four phases are Descriptive, Personal Interpretive, Critical and Creative. I shared this material with Jo Nelson when she was writing The Art of Focused Conversation. You can find more about it on page 24 of that book. Matthew Fox's description of the fourfold path of Creation Spirituality also takes one on a deepening journey: Via Positiva, Via Negativa, Via Creativa and Via Transformativa. I'm taking an online course, Integral Enlightenment, with Craig Hamilton. Quite intense. The response of the thousand-plus participants around the globe reminds me of how some of us responded to RS-1. The evolutionary spirituality movement, with its call to be "pioneers on the point of evolution," has a familiar feeling tone. On my third reading of Evolutionary Enlightenment by Andrew Cohen, I'm charting it, rather laboriously, as I tend to do things. I think it brings Kaz's Spiritual Exercises into the 21st century with a rather practical application. We're living in exciting times. Blessings, dear colleagues, Jann McGuire Illness as Initiation: An Unlikely Heroine's Journey at _http://booklocker.com/books/5100.html_ (http://booklocker.com/books/5100.html) _http://jannsjewels.blogspot.com_ (http://jannsjewels.blogspot.com) In a message dated 5/3/2012 8:22:01 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jlepps(a)pc.jaring.my writes: Colleagues: Since this stream has involved a bit of ORID-bashing (or de-sanctifying if you prefer) I’d like to say a little on its behalf. O-R-I-D is simply the sequence in which the mind works. We perceive something, we react to it, we make sense of it, and we act appropriately. When a facilitator sequences conversation questions in that order, the dialogue flows naturally. The “depth” to which it goes depends on the subject and the group and, to some extent, the facilitator. We recently presented this “method” to a group of judges in Singapore and invited them to try it with a scripted conversation at their 5 tables. The topic was “mentors.” The bottom dropped out; All five table conversations went deep, and awe filled the room. On reflection, the people gathered said the reason it worked was the sequence of the questions: they flowed naturally. Often that type conversation yields pious or abstract characteristics of mentors; this one was specific and based on experience of group members. As an outside observer during this conversation, I thought it became a spirit conversation under the category of meditation. ORID, though belonging to the ToP suite of methods, is not “ours” alone. I attended a workshop at an IAF meeting in Germany in which the workshop leader (from the UK) presented a conversation method entitled 4-F (facts, feelings, findings, future). The leader had never heard of ORID. When you see what passes for group conversations in most situations, having a sensible sequence that considers how the mind works is a major step forward. How “deep” we let it go depends on how well thought-through our questions are at the “I” and “D” levels – and what is our aim in conducting the conversation in the first place. I look forward to your responses. John Epps At 05:06 AM 5/3/2012, you wrote: Steve, I revere the "art form" methodology as much as and appreciate its contribution over the years to our "knowing." However, in more recent years I've arrived at a slightly evolved understanding of knowing, having not so much to do with clarity, awareness, consciousness and all of that as we used to define those words. For me knowing now has more to do with "metanoia," what the late Willis Harman called "mind change," which I take to mean seeing the world differently to the extent that one revises ones stories of reality and as a result, lives life differently. The NT translation of "metanoia" is "born again," and it can occur again and again in the course of a lifetime. To allow this to happen, I'm finding conversational approaches like Bohmian (physicist David Bohm) dialogue to be more effective. It is much less structured than ORID, and therefore more open-ended and less prescriptive about desired outcomes. It is more of an art than an art form. The conclusions arrived at by the individual participants are less important than the communal bonds established in the process, built not on the basis of having arrived at a common mind (read "consensus") regarding the subject at hand, but on the foundation of discovered and acknowledged interdependence and shared destiny, i.e., community. ORID, which still has a valuable role to play in our work, depends more on the discipline of the facilitator. "Dialogue" seems to me to depend more on the discipline of the participants, with a skilled facilitator way over on the side. I think generally we ICA types need to loosen up a bit, occasionally put away our work sheets with prescribed outcomes, and acknowledge that good things can happen, and are happening, without our having to engineer them--in the midst of which we can be participants with meaningful contributions to make in our role as partners. Randy "Listen to what is emerging from yourself to the course of being in the world; not to be supported by it, but to bring it to reality as it desires." -Martin Buber (adapted) From: steve har <stevehar11201(a)gmail.com> To: dialogue(a)wedgeblade.net Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2012 1:08 PM Subject: [Dialogue] Guernica & Conversation Roots & Shoots Regarding Wayne's assertion: "The basic phenomonology of the conversation method has not changed. It has always been oriented toward the ontological. If it isn't, it is some other method - put it that way." With respect, I'm afraid I disagree with Wayne's assertion that the basic conversation method has changed. What has changed is the the emphasis of the conversation. In the Art Form method the conversation is "for" being. It is ontological-existential and ethical. In the ORID format [as articulated in ToP] the focus is knowing and sharing something inside the context of a facilitator-client agreement with a particular group of participants. the conversation is "for" knowing i.e epistemological. Brian Stanfield's wonderful book of Focused Conversations really highlights this shift to the client-consultant workplace -which was a new field of engagement in which to practice conversation making. Reading Brian's workplace conversation models is like reading the music scores for Bach's Well-tempered Clavier. Publishing those models really did change the conversation focus in my view. Of course there is other music to score and play besides Bach's and there are other conversations to model besides conversations for knowing [epistemology]. JWM's NRM monastic distinctions are really powerful: Knowing | Being | Doing are actually phenomenological distinctions for sorting out the internal and social experiences that open up in conversations and dialogues. A conversation "for Being" [ontology] is an entirely different score and it creates an entirely different kind of conversational "music" that has a much wider and deeper expression - like the original Guernica Art From conversation did or like the Tombstone conversation did. In these conversations, you get to declare something, you get to take a stand and say what you value. The questions can reveal personal character, what was lost, what was gained, who you are being in this moment as a human being. The conversation can be profoundly existential i.e. ontological. It can also contain varieties of ontological language like mythological and religious expression. There are 2 wonderful "Tombstone Conversations" for being done recently by Charlie Rose in commemorating the death of _http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12297_ (http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12297) and Christa Tippitt Contemplating Mortality _http://being.publicradio.org/programs/2012/contemplating-mortality/_ (http://being.publicradio.org/programs/2012/contemplating-mortality/) A conversation for Doing -using JWM's NRM phenomenology is Largely unexplored in my opinion. John Epps wrote some brilliant and new Other World in This World conversations in 1996 which I found in the 6th floor Archives last summer. last summer we tried some over skype. Bruce Hanson gave a wonderful talk using the other world charts and Hoksai's pictures to describe an Appreciative Inquiry assignment at Hitachi Company on the outskirts of Tokyo. He talked about himself as being a navigator on an otherworld trek. In my view the Jenkins's book on the 9 disciplines is a clearheaded translation of the old monastic categories. What remains is to see clearly the Knowing Being and Doing phenomenology in practice and in roles like the role of a facilitator and the new roles of pedagogue, story maker, coach, navigator So in sum, the point wasn't to jump on Wayne's good thoughts. The point is to make some new distinctions about conversations that freshen the wind and hear new music... Steve -- Steve Harrington _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list _Dialogue(a)lists.wedgeblade.net_ (mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net) _http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net_ (http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net) _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue(a)lists.wedgeblade.net _http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net_ (http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net) _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue(a)lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net

6 5