religion box blank

i could be watching veronica mars right now. i think i would rather be. but, the anxiety that grows within be as every day passes between blog posts has become too much to bear. therefore, i will put aside veronica, for this evening, at least.

i had a conversation with someone recently about, statistically, how many christians there are in america. i really don't remember the particulars of the conversation, but i do remember becoming irritated.

most people in this country, according to statistics, identify themselves as christians. i'm not really one for drawing lines between "real" christians and "fake" christians. if such things exist, i certainly hope it's not my job to make the distinction.

what does bother me, however, is how religion is identified with almost like a nationality - something we just are, by no choice of our own. christianity is an intentional journey. it bothers me when people claim it only because they don't want to leave the religion box blank.

if i called myself a painter, simply because my parents were painters, i would not be taken seriously. if i called myself a painter because i found the art form interesting, i would not be taken seriously. if i called myself a painter because, even though i wasn't really into art, if i were, it would be painting, i would not be taken seriously. why, then, when people give these reasons for calling themselves christians, is it often taken seriously?

i can only imagine that i'm not the only person who feels this way about their faith. any time that a person claims to be something that comes at a cost they haven't paid (for instance, learning to paint), someone will probably be slightly irritated, at least. i'm not really talking about seekers, or people unsure, but taking steps to find truth. i'm talking about people who have no interest in incorporating the spiritual into their everyday lives, but enjoy the christian label for it's let's-fit-in benefits. we're not supposed to fit in.

i'm not sure about how much i have sounded like a brat, whining about something that's not really important, but i urge you to let me know.

my foot is broken, my heart is whole

as it turns out, wearing stilettos and flip flops for several hours over the last weekend, and then working both jobs on my first day back, does not have any sort of healing effect on my broken sesamoid bone. sigh. my foot hurts. i haven't blogged in a little while, and what finally motivated me to do so was my hurting foot. that seems silly.

despite my complaining, which, believe me, is as irritating to me as to anyone, i had a really wonderful weekend in baltimore. i say weekend, but i left right after work on wednesday and didn't return until late last night. i went for a wedding and went early to help with weddingy things and to spend time with my dear friends and college roommates. there were four of us and as of saturday at about 4:30pm, i am the only unmarried one left. i'm very happy for all of them. i'm genuinely happy that each of them have found wonderful men who love them. at each wedding, my eyes teared as i watched my beautiful friend walk in white down the aisle. i can't really pretend, though, that everyone of the tears came from joy. for every few joyful tears, there was one, a small one, that was the only external evidence of a small part inside of me that was mourning. for every dear friend that gets married, i seem to feel less and less understood by the world.

i think that sounds strange, but i can't really think of another way to say it. oh wait, i just thought of an analogy. (who's surprised?) it's like when someone moves away. you're still friends, best friends, even. but, they can't really understand your life because theirs is so different, even though it was once the same. we both are growing and moving, but where we were once growing and moving in the same direction, we've now separated slightly. the distance between and the rate at which it grows depends on many things: how close you were to begin with, how many things you still have in common, etc.

i still love all of my married friends dearly, value our relationships greatly, am inspired by them and learn a lot by watching them; things that i know will come in handy one day. but, that doesn't really stop me from sometimes wishing that we were all young, single professionals, living in the same place, sharing the same joys and fighting the same fights. i sometimes even wish we were still in college. eh, maybe not really. i think i would just like to re-live some of our fondest memories. that would be nice.

all of this brings me to my next topic: singleness. i've decided that singleness is a skill and, like other skills, some people are naturally good at it, some have to work at it, some never even try it, and others, though they are forced to practice it, have such a bad attitude that they never really reap its benefits - like a little kid who's mother forces him to take piano lessons, but who hates it so much that he never improves.

i will be honest and say that i'm pretty great at it - singleness, that is, though i did take piano lessons. i don't know if it's a natural thing, or if it's only because i've had so much practice that i am such an expert, but now it is merely second-nature. it does seem, however, that for people who have not had as much practice as i, that singleness can be pretty tough, or even impossible to get the hang of. for some, this means that they're perpetually in relationships, which is fine, as long as they're healthy and functional, of course. i used to think/hear that it was important to be comfortable on your own before you can be comfortable in a relationship. while this might be "ideal," and probably good advice for teenagers, it no longer seems practical for adults. then again, i'm an expert at being single, not at being a serial-adult-dater, so i could be wrong.

the ones that i really feel bad for are those who despise singleness, but can't seem to get into a relationship. this seems to always end in a kind of irritating misery (like the little kid, sitting at the piano, not picturing an egg under each of his poised hands, but picturing an egg on the head of his teacher). i don't really have any sort of advice for these people, except "be happier; you can have lots of fun on your own and with other people that you love, or at least like," but i have my doubts that that's helpful. in my experience, nothing soothes the lonely heart other than companionship.

ice cream might work, too. not that i've tried that.

in the end, i never want to look back on a time in my life and wish that i would have appreciated it more. (after all, no one ever says "i wish i would have gotten married younger," right?) therefore, i try to appreciate every season that comes my way. singleness has been pretty good to me, and i think that our break-up might be a tough one, but i'm certainly willing to see (other) people if and when the occasion calls for it. ; )

this could be heaven or this could be hell

hotel california is one of my favorite songs to cover. i think it's because it's so angsty. one of my favorite lines is the title that i've given this post. it's appropriate to this post because i want to talk about heaven and hell in a way that is very different from the way that i ever thought about them before the age of 21. many of you may shut down now, or may have not even read this far because the idea of a heaven and a hell is just so silly. well, maybe you'll think this is less silly. seriously, i'd like your thoughts, if you would be so kind.

in college, i wrote a paper about heaven and hell after reading some sermons by N.T. Wright, a brilliant new testament theologian. i've posted it below. i know that it's long, and that i should probably re-write it in a less academic, and more succinct way, but i probably wont, and i think the ideas are worth talking about, so here it is:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kaitlyn DeConto

Dr. Kenneson

3 December, 2006

Introduction to Christian Theology

It has become clear to me, as of late, that my own beliefs regarding heaven, hell and related topics have been heavily shaped and influenced by extra-biblical ideas. The church of modernity, myself included, and even those outside of the church, have allowed imagination to supersede scripture. The most dangerous part is that we seem to be generally unaware that this replacement is occurring. As a consequence of coming to this realization, I have become responsible for exploring what, exactly, the Bible does, and almost more importantly, does not say about these issues. Truth in this area is essential because, besides the fact that to be more enlightened about my own faith is to be a more effective and useful member of the kingdom, what I find should influence the way I live my life.

In his three sermons, N.T. Wright presents a great deal of insight dealing with heaven, hell and the new life of believers after death. Some of these ideas he presents as those he has adopted himself, others he presents as noteworthy, but not necessarily found by him to be imperative. Though I do not agree with everything Wright has to say in these sermons, they have been very helpful in moving my mind away from the ever-debilitating “Sunday School box.” What I mean is that, by presenting me with ideas that differ greatly from my own, he has challenged me to either defend or abandon the assumptions that I have sustained since childhood.

Wright firsts engages the idea of hell. Of all his points, the one I found most helpful was that, contrary to what I had thought, a clear concept of hell is not delineated within scripture. He writes that “most of the passages in the New Testament which have been thought by the Church to refer to people going into eternal punishment after they die don’t in fact refer to any such thing” (92 Wright). After reading this, I decided to consult my NOAB. In the index, under “hell” I found only two entries: Mark 9:43 and Luke 12:18. Upon reading both of these passages, I soon learned, through footnotes, that in both cases, the word “hell” was actually referring to a place called Gehenna, which is a deep ravine just south of Jerusalem. This place had been the site of many human sacrifices and had come to represent eternal punishment by fire. Though this discovery was not altogether shocking, it was interesting to find that, when the word “hell” was used in the Bible, it was not in reference to the specific place of eternal damnation of which I had always heard. Rather, it was being used as a culturally significant metaphor.

It is true that there are other instances in scripture where, though the word “hell” is not used, the subject matter seems to be pointing to a certain judgment inflicted upon those who refuse repentance. Wright explains that, similarly, many of these do not refer to eternal damnation of souls after death, but rather, an earthly punishment for those nations that act in defiance of the sovereignty of God; a sort of “marriage” of hell and earth. In Wright’s words, “Horrific judgment – this-worldly judgment, the devastation of cities and the tearing apart of nations – will follow the decision to go on worshipping other gods” (94 Wright). This idea provokes a much different perspective. Not only is hell not necessarily a physical, fiery place “below” us, but it can also be tasted here on earth.

One idea Wright presents, and then rejects, is that, by continually disregarding the will of God, humans can, in effect, de-humanize themselves. Those who are “unsaved” are then, at the time of death, no longer human and therefore lose the immortality of the soul. This idea, as explained by Wright, is called the “‘conditional immortality’, that is, the granting of immortality only to those who are saved, and the annihilation of those who are not saved” (95 Wright). Even though Wright states that he does not believe this, it is still an interesting thought and, I believe, a noble attempt to harmonize the justice and grace and God.

While trying to determine how these ideas compare with the doctrines concerning hell that I have been familiar with, I realized that, perhaps because of the limited information that is available, this topic had often been glossed over and the only ideas that I had to begin with are as follows: eternal, painful separation from God. The physicality of the place was blurred, leaving me with a vague notion full of holes that have been, subconsciously, filled by Dante. Therefore, the greatest help provided for me by Wright through this sermon was not necessarily a description of what hell is, but what hell is not necessarily.

Wright’s discussion of the reality of heaven was equally enlightening. Perhaps one of thd most important things that this particular sermon accomplished was to name the popular idea of heaven oppressive and incorrect. The author writes that “[the traditional] idea of ‘heaven’ has been used to back up exploitation on the one hand and dry-as-dust moralism on the other: because this strange distant place exists, and because you might want to go there yourself some day, you’d better behave nicely here – which often means, you’d better sit down, shut up, and don’t be a nuisance” (99 Wright). Though I have often felt uneasy about the “reward for being good” attitude toward heaven that seems to be ubiquitous in western culture, I would never have had the (what I would have considered to be) audacity to deem it oppressive, for fear of being heretical. Fortunately, Wright helped to free me from this train of thought so that I might explore what, exactly, the Bible does have to say about heaven.

What does the Bible have to say about heaven? To answer this question, I, again, consulted my NOAB. Surprisingly, I found not one instance in which the word ‘heaven’ was used alone. In almost every case, the phrase that is used is the ‘kingdom of heaven’ or the ‘kingdom of God.’ In Matthew 13, Jesus uses several parables to help his disciples understand the kingdom. Not one of these parables paint a picture that looks anything like the heaven I have thought to be true. Rather, each of the stories explain an idea that sounds more that the ideas presented by Wright. These ideas depict heaven, not as an other-worldly place, far, far away, but rather, another dimension of this world. Wright explains that “[heaven] is all around us, glimpsed in a mystery in every Eucharist and every act of generous human love” (100 Wright).

There are, at least, two reasons that my idea of heaven is vital to the way that I live my life. First, if heaven is somewhere distant, then that would force the conclusion that Jesus is somewhere distant. Secondly, if heaven is, indeed, a place that is all around us, begging to be sought, then my duty is no longer to keep my ‘admit one’ ticket to heaven, but rather it is to work everyday to see it realized here on earth. Consequently, my responsibility shifts from being only to myself, to incorporating my community here on earth. It is a call to live counter-culturally in a world that is driven by a quest for power, as Christ did, so that the kingdom might be spurred, as it was through the life and death of Jesus. Wright writes that “over against the love of power, the ascension of Jesus sets the power of love” (103 Wright).

This new definition of heaven raises a new question: if heaven is something that can be seen on earth during life, then what happens to believers when they die? My previous thoughts on this subject did not exceed closing my eyes on earth and opening them in heaven, where I would live forever praising God with my new and perfect, though not tangible body. I had heard something about the dead raising from their graves, but I did not know enough, nor did I apparently care enough, to fit these ideas into my pleasingly simple chronology of the afterlife. In retrospect, the biggest problem I see with this view is that it completely disregards creation and everything physical. I often forget that God did make all of creation physical and tangible. Not only did He make it this way, but said that it is good. Considering this, it becomes more difficult to believe that nothing physical would be involved in the afterlife.

In light of this, I am increasingly led to believe that the fulfillment of heaven, much like the glimpses of heaven we now experience, will be a physical experience. Wright writes that “if what you hope for is the renewal of this world, rather than the abandonment on this world, then resurrection follows naturally” (109 Wright). Paul wrote to the Corinthians with this same message. I Corinthians 15:52a-54: “For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When this perishable body puts on the imperishability, and this mortal body puts on immortality, then the saying that is written will be fulfilled: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.” Therefore, just like heaven is something to be experience during and after life, human physicality is something to be experienced, and even fulfilled after death. Wright explains that “our humanness is precious; God takes it so seriously that he has promised to bring it out, as it were, in a new edition” (114 Wright).

I have found many of Wright’s insights very helpful in my own theological journey. Though my research was by no means exhaustive, I have also found those of his ideas I chose to discuss to resonate with scripture very well, which is imperative to any theological thought, new or old. As in many other areas of theology, the discussion of the end times is not an easy one. There are no clear answers that can define for us what exactly happens when an individual life ends, the world ends, or even when humans engage the supernatural here on earth. Even though our scriptural sources of information are limited, it seems that the greatest danger when in an eschatological dialogue is not that we might not possess truth, thought it is important to be educated, but rather that we might assume that we do possess truth, therefore closing the dialogue and preventing our own education. Considering this, I am grateful that, through this assignment, my mind has been opened to future discussions that may aid my own pursuit of truth.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I liked reading this again after so long. I liked thinking of myself as more of an academic, learned, smarty-pants-type person than I am right now. It also makes me miss school and learning things. In keeping with my personality, however, I also like being out of school as a young professional, with a bit more freedom. The grass is always greener, I suppose.

be a better world shopper

i have several, what i like to call, "blog life phases." right now, i'm in the "blog life phase" where i have a handful of not-fully-formed ideas floating around in my head, each with the potential of becoming a perfect post. the problem is that it takes time and energy to develop and type these perfect posts, time and energy that i'm being a bit selfish with, at the moment. actually, selfish isn't even really the right word because writing here helps me more than anyone, i'm convinced, so it's not really selfishness as much as masochism.

in any case, i took a step in the right direction this morning by creating titles for each of the perfect posts and saving them here (only i can see them until i click "publish") so that i will not forget them, and maybe, just maybe, i'll find it within myself to write them all in the near future.

by now, i'm sure you're pretty confused as to how the title of this blog is appropriate. you may have even decided that it's not. shame on you. no faith. everything i've written here so far is more of a parenthetical thought, or an FYI. the real post starts . . . right . . . now!



money is power. this, we know. so, whether you have a little bit of money or a lot, you still have some amount of power. don't fool yourself - even if you have very little money, how you use it is important. it's like a vote. sure, one vote may not matter, but if everyone acted according to that thought, then no one would vote, and then an election, which is supposed to interpret the wants of the majority, would be completely ineffective.

and in this money-spending vote, you don't have the option to abstain. i suppose it is possible to not buy anything, but for most of us, it's not considered a choice. so, we vote. we're always voting, every day we vote. every time we hand someone our credit/debit card or dollah dollah billz, we're voting in favor of that establishment.

this is beautiful and terrifying. why? the same reason that allowing every person in the country to help pick a president is beautiful and terrifying: equality is great, but it comes with a huge amount of trust, that the people with the power are going to use it responsibly. the problem arises when the trusted, powerful people don't educate themselves so that they can make an informed decision.

let's not be that person. if i'm going to vote in favor of a gas station, a grocery store, or a shampoo brand, i should probably know a little bit about it first. i wouldn't give my vote to a presidential candidate only because i thought they looked nice and so i shouldn't shop at a clothing store only because i like there clothes.

as globalization continues, large corporations gain more and more power - power we help give them, every time we buy their product. if they're not using that power responsibly, it's our duty to withdraw our support. it's the only way. but, like the presidential election, one vote doesn't matter unless it's accompanied by the majority, so let's educate ourselves and spread the word.

buying local is usually the best choice, but not always possible or practical.

of course, if i want to know about Wal-Mart's social and environmental practices, i can't really just go to their website and click on the link that says "why we're evil," i have to dig a little deeper than that. it's kind of an overwhelming and daunting task - researching every company we buy from. i completely understand this.

there are, however, some sites that make it easier for us. this is one:
http://www.betterworldshopper.com/rankings.html

that site is great place to start. i feel kind of silly writing all of this, because i'm by no means the greatest example of responsible money-voting, but i am finding it more and more important, and so appreciate resources that make it easier, like this site.

if you know of any other helpful resources, please post them for all of us aspiring responsible citizens.

happy shopping!

from the horse's mouth, sort of

a little over a month ago, i was invited to be a part of a team that would travel to haiti to do a bit of volunteer work. to my sadness and frustration, i was not able to use my vacation days for this purpose. i don't want to talk about it, but i will say that if you know/hear of any great jobs, let me know.

though i wasn't able to travel to haiti, members of my family were. one of these was alisha, my cousin-in-law. upon returning, she wrote an email to all of those of us back here who were supporting the trip in thoughts and prayer, if not in physical presence. she added a story at the end of her email that i particularly appreciated, so here it is:

One afternoon our translator Enel took Aisha and me into town, and as we walked around we came upon a medium sized church vibrating with sound. As we approached, we saw that even though it was mid-day, the courtyard was filled with people. We made our way to the back of the church and saw that it too was full of people standing shoulder to shoulder, worshiping God and praying. But it was not only after the earthquake that Haiti hosted lovers of God. I'm told that during the month of December, the young people of the orphanage spent hours every night, on their own initiative, worshipping Christ and thanking him for his sacrifice. God allowed this earthquake, but not because Haiti lacks his lovers, anymore than Job's troubles were caused by his lack of love for God.

that's all. i just thought it was worth sharing. i made alisha's name above a link to her blog, so if you'd like to read more or contact her, have at it.

that was just a dream some of us had

i'm sorry if the title of this post is misleading. it maybe made something inside you jump at thoughts of an interesting dream, a telling hope, or an inspirational story. this is none of that. it's actually just an update about me. i haven't written one in a while, and, assuming that not everyone who reads this works in my office (though i'm very grateful to those who do), i thought that maybe someone might care about what's going on in my life, i know i do.

what does that have to do with the title? well, first, i have already used at least one variation of "update" and "things" and any other more appropriate title, in the titles of past updates. therefore, i was forced to come up with something a bit more creative. second, i'm going to california tomorrow morning, and, as that is the case, i started thinking about different songs that i like that talk about california. mostly, i just inserted "california" for "carolina" in "i'm going to carolina in my mind," but when i realized my mistake, i turned to joni mitchell. of course. i love her, if you didn't know that. her blue album, i would say, is one of my favorite albums ever. she has a song called "california" and in it, she sings:

sitting in a park in paris, france,
reading the news, and it sure looks bad.
they wont give peace a chance,
that was just a dream some of us had.
**disclaimer - that might not be a perfect quote because it came out of my head, and not off of lyricsaz.com.

now you see - i stole a line for my title.

okay, on to the real things. i'm going to use a bulleted list, because that's fun.

• i'm going to california tomorrow. actually, my flight leaves in less than 8 hours. it was a last minute sort of thing. my lovely aunt lori and uncle steve own a vineyard in northern california, and are commissioning my father and me to play some music there during a wine festival this saturday. my dad is staying all week and, i think, will be playing more music next saturday at my cousin's graduation party (yay for sara!!). i would have loved to stay, too, but couldn't take that much time off of work, and have a wedding in d.c. to attend on the following sunday. nevertheless, i am pretty ecstatic to be spending the weekend in wine country with my delightful family, even though i have to come back on monday.
• as of june 1st, all of my tenants will be out of my house. steven is already gone. he bought a house about 2 blocks up the street from me (yay steven!!) and katie and suzanne will be spending the summer in costa rica (yay katie and suzanne!!). june and july will bring sub-letters, dancers in town for the american dance festival. august will bring the return of katie and suzanne, and the permanent replacement for steven. she came to visit this week and, though it was a short visit, it was a lot of fun and i'm convinced that there will be many more good times to be had, come august.
• my foot is broken. i, perhaps, should have started with this one, since it's been the case for a while now. my foot had been hurting since, well i'm not really sure when. i'd like to say the late fall/early winter. i finally went to the doctor about a month ago, and they told me it was broken. that would explain all of the pain every time in engaged stilettos or the warrior pose. i have to wear a dumb boot now, and it's really becoming such a nuisance that i fear i may have forgotten about every other nuisance in my life. they all pale in comparison to this nuisance. ahg. i have given up the gym, even though i'm sure there's lots i could do, simply because i'm angry about being limited by a tiny, fractured bone in my foot. i can't wait tables, which has made me kind of poor - another nuisance, that really just adds to the annoyance of the primary nuisance.
• i'm thinking i will audition for american idol this summer. the cities/dates haven't been announced yet, but i would like to say that i tried.
• my job - bleh. i still feel generally un-valued (not even really undervalued, just un-valued) by the owners of the company, and then, sort of by default, by my direct management. it could be worse. i've taken on a very different sort of role (in addition to my other roles) in the textbook-publishing process that is proving to be fun. i get to work with art more - kind of managing the rendering, editing, organizing, naming, sending to freelancers. i'm not really sure whether it's actually fun, or i just think it is because it's different. only time will tell.
• alisha and i are making big plans for overseas travel. a long-termish (probably no more than a year, but who knows) combination of volunteer work and run-of-the-mill backpacking. why? i think that "why not?" is a more appropriate question. more to come on that.
• i've joined match.com. well, i actually joined in a couple of months ago. nothing has really come of it, and i'm pretty skeptical. i mostly did it out of romantic boredom (not sure if that can be a legitimate phrase, but let's run with it). it's kind of fun - getting emails and "winks" and then looking at profiles and deciding why it is, exactly, that there's no way. i've been on a couple of dates, and that's been good because the whole dating world still feels like another planet to me. mars, perhaps? i have more to say on the matter, but not here because that's weird. ask, if you'd like. it may or may not be weirder.
• steven bought a ukulele, so that's fun.
• i have every intention of taking a photoshop class this summer. we'll see.
• i absolutely love glee.
• i started posting twitpics of big rubberband ball that i have at my desk. i think they are great fun. they entertain me every time i post them and i know that other people look at them because there's a view counter on the twitpic site, but no one ever says anything about them. that makes it funnier because it creates or a sort of mystery for me about what people are making of my rubberband ball twitpics. if you haven't seen any of them, go here.

i guess that's it. i want to go to sleep now. thanks for reading this. maybe i'll write from california (she said, knowing full well that she would not...).

Jackson Pollock-brain

i learned something. i learned it last weekend. i think i may have already "known" it, but you know how it goes - some things you can't actually know until you're there. for instance, when i was in school, i "knew" that it would be hard to find a well-paying job with a humanities degree, but now i actually know it.

i learned last weekend that fears and assumptions, no matter how well-founded they might be, come up against a particular and unavoidable challenge when spoken out loud (or written). also, the longer the fdars and assumptions go unspoken, the more they are challenged when they are spoken. i think that's because the longer things live only in our heads, the more we distort them. they may have looked like a Dorothea Lange when they went in, but they come out looking like a Jackson Pollock.

that's why it's important that we not let things live only in our minds for too long. not that there's anything wrong with Jackson Pollock, it's just that clarity, at least for me, is an important something when it comes to how i view the world around me.

and if we're being candid, which we are, because i'm the only one here, i've realized even more, how important it is that i write here - it keeps things from living only in my head for too long. even if no one reads it, at least mostly-formed thoughts on paper are more easily judged than less-formed thoughts floating around in my head.

therefore, speak to people, write to people, or even speak or write to no one. it's all better than having a Jackson Pollock-brain.