RIP Bob Smith

One day, back when I was teaching at Willis College, I was off to get my usual coffee. I had tucked my bible under my arm to do some reading. At the lights a fellow made some comment about the bible and we got to talking. He shared how this man had approached him one day at a similar Ottawa crosswalk and chatted for a while, in the process this man had simply shared his faith and started this fellow on his own Christian journey. I asked a few more questions and was not surprised that the evangelist in question, the man who had approached him years before, was my old friend Bob Smith. Bob had this knack of knowing where people where at and how to enter into a conversation with them. He'd regularly sit down with strangers and chat with them about life and in the most easy going way he'd tell them about his relationship with Jesus. Many of those people would find their way to our little church - Open Arms Foursquare Gospel Church. A more motley band of misfits I've never encountered anywhere else - nor have I ever experienced a church with a stronger sense of God's presence. I know it wasn't perfect, in fact the church is not there anymore. But it was in that church that I first took on a pastoral role. Bob gave me that opportunity and, more than that, he was an excellent mentor.

Bob passed away this past week. I hadn't seen him in many years, last time I did age had taken quite a toll on him. He had a tendency to burn himself out in ministry, that didn't help I'm sure. But the way he loved people was exemplary. He always seemed to have time for people, listening, making them laugh and of course sharing his faith. I remember one of my first walks through the Byward Market with Bob, he was always seeing the best in people and with enthusiasm he introduced me to the people he called friends - although many, many of them would have nothing to do with any other Christians.

Bob would often share his own story of being a drunkard public servant - when one day he passed by an evangelistic rally on parliament hill. He met Jesus there and, like the woman at the well, nothing was going to stop him sharing Jesus with everyone he met. Bob preached of a Jesus who so loved him that when Bob was at his lowest, Jesus picked him up and gave him a new life. He preached this message on street corners and from pulpits. It wasn't a complicated message - but, nevertheless, it was a life changing one. 


The picture above was a common joy for us - Bob preaching. A typical Open Arms service ran three or more hours. Usually an hour of singing, then whoever introduced the speaker would preach their own sermon, then a sermon and before you knew it another hour had passed. Then we'd have extended worship and ministry times, praying for anyone and everyone. When you consider that we almost always came an hour early to pray for the service (some of the most incredible prayer services of my life!) there had to be something special there. I'm not sure I could stand that much time in most services - but the time there was like nothing else I've ever experienced. It was always over way too soon.

Bob has gone, but his mark on my life continues. I know that I am far from alone. Rest well my friend, you have earned your peace.

Lovers of Truth?

What does it mean to be a lover of truth? 

Does it mean we love statements that seem to validate the veracity of our own tightly held beliefs no matter how questionable the statements might be? (ie. accepting statements attributed to historical persons without verifying if those persons actually made the statements at all.)

Does it mean we close off all sources of knowledge that might possibly contain false, false according to our own ideologies, claims? (ie. refusing to listen to 'secular' media to find out what is happening in the world or only reading theologians who share your presuppositions.)

or

Does it mean we love the pursuit of truth trusting that if God is Truth then God is in the search?

How we answer these questions will decide if we are lovers of truth or lovers of feeling like we are right:

• One is a position of courageous faith - willing to risk it all to find God and the other is the false hope that if we shut our eyes then all our assumptions will keep us safe. 
• One recognizes that God, like Mr. Beaver says of Aslan, is good but not safe (tame) and the other is an effort to domesticate God. 
• One lays its own tightly held beliefs down before God the other makes idols out of ideas.
• One says we trust God wherever God leads and the other already knows where they are going (regardless of if God is leading). 
• One is willing to be continually transformed by the encounter of God and the other has set up a camp at the base of the mount of transfiguration ready to camp on their own interpretation of events rather than listen to Jesus alone. (Mark 9:5-8)

Something to think about.

From What Is Not There

Longtime readers will know that I am no fan of Ray Comfort's propositional and confrontational brand of evangelism. The problem is that I'm writing the section of my thesis that critiques the truncation of the gospel to nothing but substitutionary atonement and Comfort is a good example of how bad that can get. So as I'm trying to find academic language to explain what we evangelicals call backsliding I'm pulling books off my shelf - popular evangelical books. Comfort's Hell's Best Kept Secret was at hand. Opening it up to the chapter "Who Are the Backsliders?" I am treated to this little travesty. 

Comfort's opening argument is that real salvations stick and do not need discipleship. How does he come up with this obviously unbiblical proposition? From what is not said about Philip's baptism of the Ethiopian Eunich. Basically he assumes that because Philip did not do follow up that we should not feel bad about not engaging in discipleship. This earned an immediate WTF in the margin. But the idea has me furious. It is all that I feel is wrong with evangelicalism. We really only want clean ideological conversions and none of the messiness of walking out new life with people who are interested in the Christian faith. I wonder how Comfort reconciles this bout of poor exegetical work with Jesus' actual imperative to make disciples? 

The truncation of the gospel just does not work. As Newton Fowler has said, even though the "truncated gospel resembles the biblical gospel it is not commensurate with the gospel." We need a bigger vision of the gospel - one that matches the size and love of our God. 

In the meantime, I'll put Comfort's book back on the shelf so my eye will stop twitching!

Armageddon Factor: Religion, Politics, and Education

I had the amazing opportunity to organize and moderate a panel this year titled: The Armageddon Factor and the Changing Role of Christianity in Canadian Politics.The title comes from Marci McDonald's alarmist report on the rise of what she has called Christian Nationalism in Canadian politics. McDonald's book was quite hard to read, not that it was difficult, but rather that she has a bit ugly brush which she uses to paint people that I actually know quite well. Some of her comments are good and important, but often she just does not get the culture or really the people she is vilifying. Apart from that, McDonald does highlight an area of study that has been neglected by proper scholars - the changing roles of and relationships between religion and politics in Canada. McDonald is not the only one to recognize this deficiency, Dennis Gruending has a similar, and more irenic, report called Pulpit and Politics (I will review this book sometime soon) - but even he does not go as deep as we need to in understanding the intersection of religious and political currents in our country. What we know is that our country is changing and those changes will have wide ranging effects for many aspects of Canadian life, this panel happened to focus on how such changes will impact theological education in Canada.

The panel opened up with Catholic scholar Lee Cormie calling for a wider conversation. McDonald's book focused on a troubling Americanization of some Canadian evangelical groups - really this is nothing new, but what is new is how visible these groups are in the life of the Hill. But these are not the only religiously motivated groups active in Canadian politics. The other reality Cormie brought to our attention was that theological education in Canada is already undergoing a huge shift - a shift that another panelist, Jeff McPherson, will elaborate on in terms of evangelical culture. But Cormie sets up the conversation brilliantly setting the tone for a rich conversation.

Next up we had King's University College professor Margie Patrick engage directly with McDonald's book. Patrick has written specifically on this book and her current academic research is on the political engagement of Canadian evangelicals. Patrick outlined some of the problem areas of this text and even highlighted a few EFC articles that show a more inclusive form of evangelicalism politically engaged in Canada. While we probably should find the grand standing actions of the Faytene Grasseschi's troubling, they are not the same thing as say Preston Manning's efforts to help evangelicals become politically savvy enough to engage in public discourse. Often it is easy to get swept up by ideas we just might not agree with.

Jeff McPherson brought us up to speed with the changing role of theological education in Canada. He detailed the shift from confessional bible colleges to Christian liberal arts schools and where this shift was struggling to remain relevant to the parents of this present generation. These are important shifts and are not limited to evangelical confessions. One of the fears that comes out of McDonald's book is that no one is paying attention to the changes she finds so troubling - McPherson highlights another area we are blind to the changes in, but employing a grace and eloquence that McDonald lacks.

Liberal MP John McKay ushered us into the religious influences of the current House of Commons. An obviously sharp mind, McKay talked about the religious roots and realities of all the sitting parties - from Elisabeth May to Stephen Harper. McKay talked about where the NDPs and his own Liberal party were failing to connect with their historic religious bases. If McDonald is convinced that evangelicals are paying too much attention to politics - McKay helped us see that politicians, many of them at least, are paying too little attention to religion.

The panel was completed by the dynamic and witty director of the Chester Ronning Centre David Goa. If you have never heard Goa speak you are missing out. He exhorted evangelicals and other Christians to get their acts together and stop messing with his church (he is Orthodox)! That sounds harsh, it was said sort of tongue in cheek, but he did outline the realities of the evangelical gravitation to the Orthodox church. This underscored the importance of this conversation for all religions in Canada. Goa brought together the insights of the whole panel while at the same time calling for us to attend to this dimension of our public life as Canadians.

The panel was opened to questions from the floor and lively discussion ensued. I was so caught up in the whole thing that I forgot to take a picture for this post. It was really that good.

One final note about this panel, the fact that it was jointly sponsored by both the CTS and CETA is important to recognize. This collaboration speaks of a recognition from both societies that more dialogue needs to happen. These are not evangelical issues, or even Christian issues - but they are Canadian issues that affect all Canadians. We need the diversity of voices to grow so that we can not only understand, but properly respond to the changes in religion and politics in Canada.

Off To Congress

It is that time again, Congress. Tomorrow I drive to Waterloo with my good friend Mike, should be a good trip. Tomorrow night it is the CETA exec dinner, then Sunday morning we begin with worship. Richard, the president, and I have put together a nice little liturgy to open our part of the conference. A little Vineyard worship mixed with a few hymns - I'm liking it. I wish I had time to swap my guitar strings though, they need changing. We have a full day of papers and then in the evening I have the CTS exec dinner. Monday I am chairing a joint panel - CETA/CTS which is kind of a big deal. We have five panelists: Lee Cormie, Jeff McPherson, John McKay, Margie Patrick, and David Goa. We are looking at the changing relationship between religion and politics in Canada with an eye on how it impacts academic theological education. Our starting point is Marci McDonald's Armageddon Factor, which if you haven't read, is a journalist's take on the rise of what she calls Christian Nationalists. Really she is fairly alarmed at the evident political involvement of those Christians who hold a restorationist theology, similar to what drives a lot of fundamentalist political engagement in the US. There are things I think we need to be alarmed about here - but, as Dennis Gruending astutely points out, McDonald simply does not have a good understanding of the evangelical subculture and how it works. BTW I will be doing a review of Gruending's book, Pulpit and Politics, soon. After this though it is mostly taking in papers and networking. I really need to come up with some leads on teaching work. 

God Loves Life - So Should We

 “The thought of death and a life after death can lead to fatalism and apathy, so that we only live life here half-heartedly, or just endure it and ‘get through’. The thought of a life after death can cheat us of the happiness and the pain of this life, so that we squander its treasures, selling them off cheap to heaven.”

Moltmann, The Coming of God, 50.

Should We Lie For Christ?

Perhaps it is a product of reading Marci McDonald's The Armageddon Factor. At least that has brought fresh light to the idea that some Christians, especially in my Charismatic/Pentecostal world, seem to think it is ok to lie to further their ideological agendas. I framed the title of this blog deliberately because I'm sure that is what they think they are doing. Just today Canada in Prayer posted a dire warning about a supposed Wiccan festival this weekend in Mississauga. The post is filled with fearful language about lengthy pagan rites and sending curses on the land. When I first read it I was thinking that they were simply misrepresenting a psychic fair or something. I was going to comment but then thought I'd do some digging. When I found nothing I called bullshit on the post. So the most audacious response so far was even if it isn't true praying can't hurt. Seriously? So it is ok to spread lies about people and events just cause it might cause them to pray some prayer against some imagined threat/event? What would that accomplish?

Well let me tell you what that will accomplish. Spiritually - nothing. However, it will entrench an ideological bias against spiritual seekers who happen to be tracking with neo-paganism. I'm sure that will really bolster our ability to witness to them, not. It will also foster fear amongst those people already afraid that Satan is lurking around behind every tree ready to trounce on them. It will also foster an unrealistic relationship to the land. If we buy the lie then we do not have to own our own culpability for the state our society and world is in. We don't have to act to change things - we just have to pray. It was telling that one poster cut and pasted a long all-caps prayer in response to this imaginary threat.

Stuff like this makes me want to shake people and tell them to wake up.

Missional Problem Areas

I have been thinking about a few of the common issues that arise with missional works. Namely, the tendency of small communities to turn inward in focus, the development of intolerance for other models of being church, and the need for metrics, just not the metrics of numbers. I want to share briefly some of my thoughts on these issues.

The first one seems like a bit of an oxymoron for missional communities. But because missional communities are often focused on building intentional community amongst a small target group they can easily turn into an exclusive club. I've experienced this with a couple of the groups I've run over the years. Part of the problem is the rejection of numerical metrics for measuring church health. I think this is a good thing to reject in a missional context, but if those metrics are not deliberately replaced with better metrics, which I will get into later, the community will replace them with metrics based on the continuation of the current structure and status quo. In other words the missional mission can end up defeating its own missional intentions. This is a big reason I am convinced that groups need to change up every couple of years. Ideally groups will train and spawn new groups, ever increasing the circle of mission. But that is easier said than done. It will never be a popular decision to pull the plug on a group that has turned inward - but it is necessary to prune these groups if the mission is to stay in missional.

The second problem comes out of the novelty of missional approaches. Another local area pastor recently expressed to me concerns over the attractiveness of missional churches to those who have been hurt within traditional models of church. This is a reality I am all too aware of, and unfortunately finding people who have been hurt by churches is far too easy these days. This is a critical issue to tackle because we could just be setting people up for being hurt again, this time by missional churches. The reason this is so hard to address is because many of us in the missional world really want to reach new people but we need folks to come along side and help - and many of these broken people are quite willing to help, at least initially. There are a few things we can do such as watch for the signs of people making the church more about themselves and their needs than about the mission. Brokenness longs for comfort, not always healing, but comfort. Our role as leaders is to always point people towards healing and remind them that discomfort is part of that journey to wholeness. We have actually encouraged folks to go back to the churches that they left and make peace with their decision to leave. We did not tell people to go endure abuse, but to find ways to face the things that caused them pain so that they would not take that pain into their next church home. I actually wish we had done this more often. Another way we can address this issue is to foster relationships with traditional forms of church. Break down the us-them lies by actively looking for ways to bless other congregations. The reality of missions is that we need each other. Many of the people who find their way back to Christ through missional churches will end up in traditional churches. If missional is really being missional it won't be for everyone. Help people find place they thrive. A final way of approaching this issue is through metrics.

The third problem is one where the traditional church has adopted an ideology of numbers. I think this needs to be critiqued, but at the same time this sort of metric should not be vilified. Big churches have different problems than small missional communities. Not worse problems, but different problems. I think it is counter-productive to criticize the structures that traditional churches used to support their ministries. A building might not be a priority for many missional communities - but that doesn't make buildings evil. Actually what it makes them is costly and every choice in ministry has associated costs.

So what kinds of metrics would be helpful in a missional context?

First there needs to be a way to measure faithfulness to the missional identity of the church. Missional churches often get that evangelism is not about confrontation, but about relationship and allowing Christ in you to shine into the lives of others. Yes, we all need to be prepared to give an account of the good news that so captured our hearts. But missional churches have pioneered ways of doing this that actually work for the urban post-modern context. There is a commitment that I often see amongst missional folk to be committed to people long before they are committed to Christ. As a metric we could look at how well we are part of our communities. Are we isolated or engaged? Do we love our neighbours or do we hardly know them?

Secondly there needs to be a way to measure the health of a missional group. Are people growing in their love for God? Are people finding the community helpful for facing lifes issues head on? Are people feeling supported in their relationships outside the community? Do we pray together? Do we laugh together? Do we cry together?

The first place I saw the kind of community I'm aiming for was in California. It was a small Vineyard house group in the Bay area. There were no more than 12 of us including kids (who often hung out in another room after worship). And aside from the worship in song there seemed to be little formal structure to the group. But no matter what the conversation started on it always came back around to God. Sometimes there might be a small devotional woven in, but it was more of a conversation. And then the conversation would lead into a delicious time of praying for each other. While I find this form of church great, what struck me the most was that within that small group people were engaged in all kinds of outreach. Three different ministries to the poor were represented there, serious dedication too. One couple were part of a group that BBQed food for homeless in a park every week. In other words they talked the talk, and walked the walk. I think missional churches have every chance to be like this community. Sure they will take on different important issues. Sure they will be structures in different ways. But the culture that was fostered is translatable. It was focused on God as a central part of their lives and that made a huge difference.

Monday Morning Winge

I feel like I took a week off. Everyone else was sick over the last two weeks, not all at once mind you but both my wife and oldest were sick for about a week with a nasty stomach virus. I spent a lot of energy trying to maintain things and not get sick myself - it was oddly draining. I need to collect my thoughts, gather my energy, and get life stuff (thesis, house, etc.) back in order. This week I have exams coming in so it will get busy after Wednesday. In the meanwhile I need to finish up Marci McDonald's super interesting Armageddon Factor - basically she is reporting on the shifting role of the religious Right in Canada. I found the chapter on Harper quite disturbing actually - I'm not a bit fan of our prime minister and McDonald did nothing but confirm my suspicions. It is the political language that is religiously charged that bothers me the most - there is no monolithic Christian worldview, nor is there a homogeneous code of ethics that Christian's somehow own. It frustrates me when such a mythical beast is asserted as if it a) exists, b) is self-evident, and c) is not simply a prop of the, often unjust, status quo. I need to finish McDonald's book so that I can prep a blurb for a panel I'm chairing at Congress this year.

Tomorrow I administer my first oral exam. Sure I've taken a few of these over the years, but in all my years teaching IT there was no oral option, and so far I've not had call for one in teaching theology. I think it will be fine. It is an evaluative unknown but my fellow profs tell me you know within a very short time if the student understands the material or not. I'm hoping it will be fairly conversational, most of the orals I've taken have been directed conversations. I once missed an oral - had my days mixed up. I showed up at school as a fluke and saw my classmates outside the prof's door. Yikes. I waited for him to come out and explained my mix up. He graciously allowed me to jump in at the end of the day. Unfortunately I had not studied for the exam - so I borrowed someone else's notes (I was not able to get mine) and began to work through the material. I think I had an hour or two. I did well on the exam - doing class work pays off - but I would not want to go through that stress again.

OK, need to get running. I still have to put together the morning blog post for ThoughtWorks. Then it is time to hit the ground running.

Of Course It Is Political

I am used to religious folk saying their actions are not political. And I expect it. This is part of how society has relegated religion to the private sphere of life and insisted it has no legitimate voice in the politics of a liberal democracy. That I get, dislike, but I get it.

But... today on the radio there was talk about taking elementary school kids down to the Supreme Court to sing and give speeches contesting the disparity between their education privileges and what is afforded to the First Nation's children. I think this is awesome to get kids politically involved. However, when one of the organizing teachers was interviewed she said, "I don't think this is political," before outlining the form of social action and judging the situation as systemic racism. She even said that part of what they have been teaching this year is how democracy is all of us, our right to stand up and be heard. So what part of that is not political?

What disturbs me is that it is quite possible that the term political is changing meaning in the modern usage - and becoming something quite useless. Political seems to only mean partisan involvement and not the whole sphere of public discourse that shapes society. And if we let politicians have exclusive domain over what is political then do we not abdicate our democratic responsibility? Oh wait, that explains why we have a Harper government instead of a Canadian government. It all becomes disturbingly clear now.

Seriously, what we do in the public that is meant to critique or shape the public is political.

More than being political, this is exactly how it is supposed to work. It is what makes our social structure different from totalitarianism or monarchism or even communism. All words that seem to strike terror in those same people who are letting go of their right to be politically engaged - yes, to do politics. And to do politics unabashedly from their own religious perspectives (even, and especially, from those I disagree with) because that is how it works. When we lay this down then we have a relativistic blob that is easily subverted by the ruling regime while we follow along like the proverbial lemmings.

I dare you. Be political. I know I am.

Busy Little Beaver

Yup, I know I'm sounding like a broken record here. I've been really, really busy. CTS paper submissions, CETA paper submissions (I'm on the exec for both so a whole lot of evaluating going on). Weekly papers to mark and a lecture to prep. New bi-weekly church group to prep. Our Sat night DM had scout camps so I prepped and ran some new material, plus have been running my own regular bi-weekly campaign. One daughter in theater school - she's going to be in Fiddler! Teaching data management at my other daughter's school and next week I'm there for a showing of the Journey of the Universe at her school. Wrote two references for students applying to grad school. Taught one seminar on tools for thesis research and writing. And the list goes on...

My free time, and it has been sparse, has been spent playing Pandemic with my kids. Most excellent game ever! And hanging out with my wife. Life is good.

OK, off to talk about the People's Temple with some keen students. I think I'll lay off the Kool-aid for the day.

Call for Papers - Canadian Theological Society

Canadian Theological Society 2012 Annual Meeting
May 28-30, 2012
Waterloo, Ontario

The theme of this Congress—Crossroads: Scholarship for an Uncertain World— invites us to reflect on uncertain changes in the disciplines in humanities and social sciences, as well as the need to generate scholarship that addresses challenges facing our uncertain world. Theologians are often practiced in engaging the uncertainties that surround our religious communities, our vocation, as well as the chronic uncertainties that well up in human life. Therefore, the theme seems one to which our members may be responsive in diverse ways.

In order to offer a cohesive program, we invite proposals on the theme of Theological Responses to an Uncertain World. We will also consider proposals on any topic in theology.

We invite submissions in two formats:

1) 20/20 Presentations


We will again follow the 20/20 format that we used for the 2011 Congress, inviting presentations of 20 minutes with 20 minutes discussion to follow. Typically the presentation will be an account of a larger research project. Since members work in a variety of fields and specializations, attention should be given to presenting advanced work in an accessible way.

Submit a proposal that includes:

• Presenter’s name, institution, and contact information
• Title of presentation
• Proposal of 250-300 words which includes an abstract, the problem your scholarship engages, and the contribution you plan to make.
• Requests for audio-visual equipment (A/V equipment will be available only if it is requested in the proposal)

2) Panels

We invite panels on issues that are relevant to members, especially as related to the theme of the annual meeting. Panel proposals should be developed to foster dialogue among the panelists and with those attending in the audience. Thus, we discourage panels which consist of the reading of several papers.

Submit a proposal that includes:

• Convener’s name, institution, and contact information. The convener will be the link between the panel and the CTS.
• Names, institutions and contact information of all members of the panel
• Either the name and contact information of the moderator, or a request that CTS provide a moderator
• Title of panel
• Length of panel (40 or 80 minutes)
• Proposal of 300-400 words which includes an abstract, the problem your scholarship engages, the contribution you plan to make, and how you plan to foster dialogue among panelists and audience (e.g., use and allotment of time)
• Requests for audio-visual equipment (A/V equipment will be available only if it is requested in the proposal)

All proposals should be submitted in a Word or .rtf file by email attachment by January 15, 2012 to: Jeremy Bergen, CTS Program Chair

We will confirm receipt of all proposals submitted by email.

Selection Criteria

In selecting proposals for 20/20 presentations or for panels, the committee will consider:

• The clarity and significance of the proposal
• The quality of the contribution to scholarship
• The relationship of the presentation to the thematic focus of the annual meeting
• The contribution of the presentation to a diversity of perspectives and approaches
• The potential for inspiring discussion and engagement among the members

Our goal as a Society is to foster collegial discussion of members’ work and of the work of other Canadian theologians. All presenters and attendees are encouraged to participate in as much of the program as possible. We welcome all members, students, and other interested persons to join us this year at the annual meeting in Waterloo, Ontario.

Poverty? Greed?

Plato once claimed that poverty is not a decrease in our possessions, but an increase in our greed. As a middle class (have) individual this has a strong ring of truth to it. It speaks to the endless fascination with material success that is so prevalent in Western society. Yet, this statement also alerts me to a need for distinction with the term poverty. While I agree that our greed impoverishes us - poverty has many roots and causes. And the kind of poverty that is caused by greed is, in my opinion, more of a spiritual poverty than a material poverty.

This spiritual poverty is not necessarily synonymous with the inability to provide sustenance for ones family. Nor  is it always indicative of an inability to "catch a break" socially that will allow your most basic needs to be met. The difference between spiritual and material poverty seems to describe the gulf between the haves and have nots - where the have nots often face destructive material poverty their concerns are grounded in the reality of putting food on the table not on having too little equity to buy a second car for purely convenience sake. Perhaps this is why I so appreciate the epistemological privilege that  Liberation Theology offers to the poor? Indeed the real remedy for spiritual impoverishment must lie in the path of solidarity with the truly poor - that is the materially poor. In fact, dare I say, one can only climb out of spiritual poverty with the help of the materially poor - because the greed that offers only spiritual poverty can never be sated, and can never offer us freedom.

Food for thought.

Theory of Religion

In the Winter semester I will be exploring the world of religions with a new class. I have some students signing up from my previous classes which has to look good to the admin! It is going to be challenging both for me and the students. I've done this sort of work as an undergrad but my grad work has all been struggling with an inside conversation - specifically focused on the nitty gritty world of evangelicals. In this course we will be trying to develop an outside perspective on a plurality of religions - putting aside our own commitments.

Yet, at the same time I want to find the place for our own commitments to come into the conversation. So the first class will have to introduce the idea of navigating conversations about world religions from a perspective of humility, expectation, and desire to bring out the best in others (and even to have the best brought out of our own religious commitment!)

My director often says that the problem with a lot of contemporary theology is that it lacks a good theory of religion. Where I think she is right is that we often think that what we practice is not religion but is somehow above the religious conversation, it has a privileged place. What is disturbing is that we all do it - Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc.  We all talk about religion in essentially two modes: world religions as a phenomenon and our religion as the only reasonable and reliable faith. Where this gets tricky is that in one sense I believe this should be why we stick with our own religious commitment - why would you adhere to a religion that you don't completely buy into? If you do you will at best only follow the bits of it that are comfortable. Religion, at its best, cannot function this way.

But the other extreme - our way the only way - is what makes religions function at their worst.

This coming semester we will be seeking to find the balance. A good theory of religion. A humble approach to the other. And a desire to be the best of our religious heritage. Sound like a challenge? I think so.

Did you Miss Me?

Ok. Semester is almost done. It is all over but the exam marking. Yikes. At least now I know what I am in for.

Needless to say I learned a lot this semester.

There are things I'm going to do differently if I run Intro to Theology again (which I hope I get that opportunity to do). For one thing I'd add a textbook. Yup, you heard right. I'd add a textbook that covered the historical stuff I want to cover. My brief romp through the history of Christian thought was all too quick and if I was supplementing a text reading then I could be more focused on a few key thinkers instead of a broad swathe.

What I wouldn't change much is my Christian Spirituality course. I really liked the way it came together and the way the students engaged with the lectures. Sure I'd tune it a bit here and there, but I think it is a good solid foundation to the study of spiritualities and Christian spiritualities in particular. Those students have a take home exam which comes in Friday after next. Hopefully I'll have all the Intro exams marked so I can focus on those at that time.

I've already started my course prep for next semester. I'm doing Religion, Culture and Diversity which is a second year course. This one is going to be challenging as it is not a course on a specific religion, in fact it is a religion studies course at heart. I will focus on North American religions and in particular those that are purposeful in spreading their ideas/beliefs beyond their cultural settings (Islam, Christianity, and Buddhism) but more because I need to set some limits on the material. The course will be broken into three parts:

1) Theory of Religion - this will have lots of case studies and class discussions.
2) Culture - this will be a brief section on cultural anthropology with a focus on the role of religious imagination in culture.
3) Diversity - this last section will focus on the diverse ways that religions speak into issues of contemporary importance, primarily ecological issues but I'm going to branch out from there. Again, lots of case studies and class discussions.

It should be a fun course.

OK, in the meanwhile I am around. But this time I won't promise to be back blogging. I'm behind still on lots of life stuff. But I'm confident that I'll find a rhythm soon.

Reading Week

What a crazy run this has been. I'm more than halfway through my courses and still loving it. But it has kept me so busy that I have been struggling to have enough time with my family let alone blogging and all the other hobby activities I engage in. I really hope that I get to teach either of these courses again, a second run through will see me so much more prepared. But I'm not sure it would be that much less work.

Marking is not something I liked when I was teaching IT. It was definitely easier to mark something if it is definitely right or wrong - but essays don't work that way. Especially when you are dealing with some highly abstract concepts at times. Most of my students (that I have evaluated) are doing quite well with the tasks and responding very well to my feedback on completed assignments. That is most satisfying. I am still committed to the idea that a big role for me in the Intro to Theology class is to give students tools with which to approach their whole time at Saint Paul University. Strangely enough though, I actually like the process of marking. I have taken the wise advice of others and built a grid for each different assignment - and after reading the paper and making comments I simply walk through the grid and end up with a grade. This ensures that the results are fair and, hopefully, consistent. It also prevents me from taking off a tonne of marks for repeated mistakes.

I was hoping to have several lectures prepared in advance - not the reality. I do have them all roughly mapped out - but each week I am constructing two sets of power point slides as well as two sets of lecture notes. The strategy of using slides to guide the conversation is helpful - it also means that my slides do not need to convey real content. Sometimes an image will suffice for a 20 minute conversation. It is the notes that really needs a lot of work. I use word and drop in mini images of the slides that the lecture section references. I've found that 12-18 pages is enough in the Intro to Theology class where students interact less and 10-14 pages is usually more than enough in the Christian Spirituality where the conversations can really take off. Took me a few weeks to get that sense for how much material will fit into the lecture based on how much interaction I can expect from the class. Interaction is a big variable - I have tonnes of experience timing out talking head material. I should say that my notes are far from detailed - lots of points. Really they keep me from getting off track - sometimes I do that especially when students start asking great questions.

This week, being reading week, is a chance to catch up on all the little tasks I've forgotten as well as prepare my final lectures. I commented to a student that I don't know who is learning more - it is an incredibly enriching experience teaching. You have to be on your toes the whole time (mentally exhausting) and ready for anything. One student even commented, out of the blue, that he could not imagine me without my goatee. That really can throw you when you are expecting a serious question. I shaved it down to my soul patch chin hawk before the next class (mostly for my wife who prefers that look)  and shocked him when he came in. Aside from being on your toes for mostly serious questions - I am learning the boundaries of my knowledge. Fortunately, I've long moved past the need to know everything and always have an answer. I'm good at thinking on my feet, but I also think I know when to defer things until I've had a chance to look into it further.

I hope to be blogging a bit more this week.

Tight Squeeze

Last night Sharon commented that she thought my working would afford us more time together. In fact it feels like we are both still running on opposite schedules. She's getting home just as I need to leave, and vice versa. Last night I was feeling overwhelmed with the need to have today's lecture completed. I was home alone with the kids in the evening and only had notes for half of it (although I really knew what I wanted to cover, the thing is writing it out helps solidify and organize things for me, and it helps me know if my slides and board word work will do the trick). I started getting angry with the kids, much to my shame. After supper they seemed to settle into a tv show and I thought I could sneak down and crank out a few more pages. Not long into it though Chelsea came down to tell me she has homework and needs help. It was an overwhelming moment, I sort of panicked and wanted to write a nasty letter to her teacher (selfish I know). I called my loving wife and she started sharing her own frustrations about being so busy at work that she hadn't been able to eat her meal. That was like a punch in the gut actually. I knew I couldn't write a letter - that was just me taking out my frustration on my family. So I actually took a few minutes to calm down and went to find Chelsea (she went off to play frustrated that she was going to have to drag her math book (who still uses math books???) back tomorrow night to do her homework then). I apologized for my poor behaviour, explained the circumstance and helped her figure out how to do her homework. She was just a bit stuck, so I unstuck her and she was off to the races.  I did get to work a bit on my notes while she did the questions she could - but after that I came up and helped her think through the last one. Then she decided to stay up and draw while I did my workout (another stress was that I hadn't gotten to that yet!) then I spent time putting her to bed. After that I realized that Elyssa needed me too - so we spent time with Buttercup Sprinkles (our new hamster) and she told me a long story about hamster facts she is reading. At this point I was no longer worried about my notes. But funny enough, after Elyssa was down I was able to finish most of my notes before Sharon got home. I did end up staying up late - but that is not such a bad price to pay for time with my kids. 

Journey Conference is this Weekend!

I knew taking on two courses would be a lot of work - but two courses and planning a conference - yikes! I am so excited (and glad) that our Journey of the Universe film premiere and conference is this weekend. Registration is really healthy and all of the last minute details are coming together. We have a great line-up of presenters on the Saturday, with the whole emphasis being on the implications of this film. Executive Producer Mary Evelyn Tucker is our keynote speaker and will be with us throughout the conference. I've seen the film already and it is very well done. I am actually really impressed that even though it is carefully not anchored in any religious or spiritual tradition - the film provides ample opportunity for people of faith to find themselves in this story. It is true to Thomas Berry's idea that religions can't offer us the solutions we need, but neither can a solution come that does not include religions. The task for those of us who are devout people of faith and take this cosmology seriously is to find the ways in which our stories are found in the great story of the Universe (or as I like to think of it, the really big picture of how truly amazing Creation is when we stop thinking Creation is just about our planet). In many ways this is the inevitable end of the Copernican revolution - we may assent to a non-geocentric cosmology, but we still often get caught up in our anthropocentrism.

Here is the line up:

Opening comments: Dr. Karlijn Demasure, Dean, Faculty of Human Sciences (Saint Paul University)
Keynote address: Dr. Mary Evelyn Tucker

Two sets of two concurrent panels:

Panel A: One Earth: Many Religions

• Heather Eaton (Ph.D.) Saint Paul University: Christianity 
• Iman Ibrahim (MA International Affairs): Islam 
• James Miller (Ph.D.) Queen’s University: Daoism 
• Noel Salmond (Ph.D.) Carleton University: Hinduism and Buddhism 
• Moderator: Frank Emanuel (yours truly) 

Panel B: Natural Sciences 

• Simon Appolloni (Ph.D. cand.) University of Toronto 
• William David, Senior Policy Analyst, Assembly of First Nations 
• Aaron Gross (Ph.D.) University of San Diego, Religion and Animals 
• John Stone (Ph.D.) Carleton University, IPCC 
• Moderator: Jessica Hetherington (Ph.D. cand.) 

Panel C: Spirituality

• Cindy Gaudet (M.A.) Metis, Moon Lodge Canada 
• Miriam Martin (Ed.D.) Saint Paul University, Religious Education 
• Ian Prattis (Ph.D.) Carleton University emeritus, Zen 
• Anne Taylor (M.P.S.) Kairos Spirituality for Social Justice Centre 
• Moderator: Kathryn Guindon (M.Sc.) 

Panel D: Social Sciences and Political Action 

• Tony Clarke, Director Polaris Institute 
• Joe Gunn, Director Citizens for Public Justice 
• Elizabeth May MP, Leader, Green Party of Canada 
• Vern Neufeld Redekop (Ph.D.) Saint Paul University, Conflict Studies 
• Moderator: Marlene Kelly (gsic), Team member of Kairos Spirituality for Social Justice Centre

Hope to see you there!

Mourning the Loss of our first Family Pet

Gracie recently celebrated her first year with us. We even baked a hamster friendly cake - honey not sugar and full of the nuts she loved. We had been treating her for an eye infection and she had been quite lethargic as of late. We noticed because she was always so full of life. Even when we were giving her eye drops she never complained or nipped. And she seemed to be pulling through, but yesterday Sharon noticed that she seemed to be getting worse again. She passed away in her sleep, the girls found her in the morning. She looked so peaceful curled up. I found an appropriately sized box which the girls decorated. We all wrote messages for Gracie on the box and placed her in there with lots of shavings, just the way she liked to sleep. We also gave her her salt lick and a wooden heart she had for chewing. I dug a deep hole in the garden (about 2.5 feet) and we spent some time sharing the things we liked most about Gracie, good memories. I loved the way she would crawl all over my arms in the evenings. We capped the burial site with some stones the girls had painted at a vacation bible school they attended this summer. I think they were supposed to make images of Jesus or the cross - but my kids never do what you expect, they had both made pictures of Gracie. So these serve as a fitting reminder of the hamster we loved so much. It is a good opportunity to learn how to grieve together. Hard as that is I think it is an important part of life. Life is fragile. My youngest asked me if I thought Gracie would go to heaven. I asked her if she believed that God loved and cared for all God created. She said she did and I told her that was her answer. I am really aware that what we say about the dead is always for the living - her final words to Gracie were about being happy in heaven. Many, many tears were shed today, and I imagine more will come tonight. Rest in peace Gracie, you will be greatly missed.

Settling in at Saint Paul

In exactly one hour I will be standing in front of a bit over 30 students talking about what we will do this semester in Introduction to Theology. I'm pretty excited. Just got situated with all my books and finally connected to the new wifi network at the school. Now to get my blackberry setup on the same WIFI so I can control my slides that way - Vectir rocks. If you are in my course, I'll be seeing you soon.