Sorry, I’m _where_?

When I left my old church just over a year ago, I had no idea where I was going apart from AWAY.  I didn’t know if I was right or wrong (They said absolutely wrong, of course), I just knew it was time for me to go.  The bird flew, knowing not where it would land.

I spent several months going through a personal emotional crisis to do with leaving – this, after all, being a group that I had spent over a decade being told was the place where God had placed me, in fact almost the only place where god could be found.  I left most of my family there, and almost all the people I called friends.  In many ways I had never become an independent adult despite being in my thirties, as independence was practically _the_ mortal sin.  Suddenly I was free to make my own decisions.  I had spent a lot of time building myself up before I left, but there was lots of work that needed to be done in order to be able to cope with the concept of freedom.

Suffice it to say that once I’d sorted out my personal issues to a certain level, I went through the inevitable “spiritual” crisis.

I recall having a conversation with a new friend in my new church, in which I said that I think I was becoming an atheist, although rather reluctantly.  She asked me if that frightened me, and I was amazed that anyone could be frightened at the concept.  It just made sense, even if it’s not how I wanted the world to be.  Nevertheless, I felt like I had to be absolutely sure that Christianity really, truly wasn’t true before I left for good.  And somehow, it appears that there’s something to it after all.  I am still not sure that I’m not deluding myself, and no doubt there are plenty who would say just that, but it seems that it really is possible that there is a loving God even though I never encountered such an entity in 25 years of being a Christian of sorts.  Somehow I seem to have done not a u-turn, but taken a different direction from that which I thought was inevitable.  Maybe I have flown from a dead tree to a living one.  Certainly I find the endless empty sky of no world-view is not enough for me.

Who’d have thought it? Not me. I sure don’t know why me, when so many others have left altogether, both from my old church and from thousands all over the world. I feel a lot more affinity with those who claim to be atheists than those who claim to be Christians. But here I am on the side, if side there be, of the Christians.  I really am astonished.

Roast-a-Preacher.

The pastors at my church have instituted what they call Roast a Preacher days.  The idea is that at the end of every big series of sermons, usually twice a year, there will be a day where instead of a sermon anyone can ask anything, in both the morning and evening service.  Last night we had the senior pastor, the associate, and one of our several seminary students answering questions ranging from “Why are there denominations and are they so doctrinally different that they are actually different beliefs?” to “Is there a Christian perspective on climate change?”, with detours through other, more standard topics like the teaching of creationism in schools, answering people who take one small passage of the Bible to prove that God or his works are evil, and the problems of the Australian church.

One of the things that I really like about this church is the attitude of the senior pastor.  He’s not afraid to put himself on the line, he’s not afraid to answer questions, he’s not afraid to say that he’s probably not right on everything, and has changed his mind on some things.  He has a good line in self-depreciation, not to mention a very tolerant wife, given some of the stories he tells.  He quite frequently opens the floor for questions at the end of sermons, particularly if he’s been preaching on a particularly controversial or difficult topic (we’ve just finished a series on 1 Corinthians, so there’s several topics right there that produced some fairly lively opinions!)  As he is the senior pastor, his attitude shapes and attracts people with similar attitudes, so in general the church is full of intelligent, questioning, thoughtful and active people.  There aren’t many who are just hangers-on, even though this church is in a high socioeconomic area and the congregation are largely highly educated professionals or tertiary students, along with a smattering of musicians and other artistic types, all with busy lives.  The level of volunteerism is very high.  There is a social conscience.

I rather wish there was some way to let people know that church is not always full of condescending conservative leaders and blind, unintelligent followers who never question what they are told.  Or perhaps, I wish that there were enough churches and Christians out there which encourage questioning that the stereotype would change.

Edit:  Roast-a-Preacher Number 2 can be found here.

A well-publicised story not yet finished.

I recently came across this interview (prelude, part 1, part 2) with the now infamous Ted Haggard, the mega-church pastor caught in a public sex scandal a couple of years ago.  It’s not so much as a straight interview as a reflection how the author, Donny Pauling, also has gone through many of the thoughts, feelings and processes that Mr. Haggard is now going through – unconventional, but I think rather good.  It was one person empathising with another about some pretty hard things he has faced.

Some of my major issues with the church are touched on in this article.  In particular, the way that churches handle those who have messed up big time because they are messed up often shows very little grace or understanding.  It boils down to this – many Christians and churches say that they believe in both forgiveness and restoration, but they do not practice it except on their own terms.  Mr. Haggard’s story of being isolated from and not being allowed to talk with his friends, parishioners and even those who were involved in his indiscretions is one that’s familiar to me both from observation and experience.  That experience leads me to believe that this approach does far more harm than good in many cases.  I have found myself that being prevented from discussing the situation with someone who hurt me very badly did not help me deal with my own not-exactly-glorious behaviour, but only made me confused, angry and depressed.  It was only a couple of years later when I finally contacted the person (without permission) that we both were able to find some understanding, healing, and even friendship.

In general, the Cone of Silence under which churches often deal with ‘sin’ is just like the one that Maxwell Smart and the Chief used in Get Smart – so silent that it actually prevents what it is intended to facilitate.  I’m not saying that everyone’s personal circumstances should be proclaimed from the rooftops, but there’s nothing that starts a rumour and grows suspicion and offense so fast as seeing someone who is “under discipline” for something that nobody knows much about, particularly if the church generally enforces a system of isolating the individual concerned even from those who may have been affected.  That can never heal a person, it can only make them feel ashamed and unfit to associate with those who should be there to love and support them, and it allows others to become bitter and less likely to be able to understand or forgive.  It is hardly surprising that many people become hurt, resentful and angry rather than working through their issues.

I’m glad that Mr. Haggard has found good counselling and the support of his family.  I’m also glad that he seems to be making an attempt to communicate with his former parishioners and to the wider public, seeing as he was formerly a public figure in whom many put their trust.  I don’t get the impression that he is trying to justify himself.  I know from experience that his description of the roller-coaster of emotions is quite accurate.  I’m also very glad that he has made the statements he has both about the study and practice of psychology being helpful, not in opposition to God or church doctrine.  Perhaps if more people in the church knew a bit about psychology and how our thoughts and emotions really work, we would have fewer people damaged and destroyed by well-meaning but misguided church behavioural practices and pastoral ‘care’.

In the meantime, I wish Mr. Haggard well in his journey.  His previous church leadership may have written him off, but it seems he’s not yet finished.

The sick-bed reading list.

So.  I’m on my way to getting better, although there’s months of medication still to come and probably a while before I have my normal energy and concentration.  But I’m back at work even though I have to be careful not to get too tired or stressed, and I’m into my second semester of psychology study.  I did a lot of reading while I was out of things though.  Here’s a sample:

The Prodigal God, Timothy Keller.  I had previously read his other book, The Reason for God, while I was in the worst of my doubt about the whole idea of God.  I love his style.  He does not assume that the majority of people who call themselves Christian have everything worked out, which to me, who views the stereotypical manifestations of US-style conservative evangelicalism with a large amount of suspicion, is a relief.  This book indicates that there is something that many Christians, as well as non-Christians, have missed – that all of our various methods of attempting to gain the approval of God, whether from rebellion or compliance, are useless.  Keller points in the direction of love for God, because He first loved us.  I have spent many, many years in churches that fail to understand this.

The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins.  I realised recently that my own attraction to atheism is due to my very negative view of God, developed from many years in a church which emphasised the Almighty, holy, vengeful God who punishes sinners and only redeems even his chosen people through devastation and suffering.  I wonder if that is the case for the majority of ex-Christians.  It certainly seems to be the view of a lot of them, and of many of the “new atheists” of whom Dawkins is a chief representative.  I certainly never started to doubt faith through reading any of Dawkins’ books, or those of the other prominent “new atheists”.  It isn’t going to happen now, either, because I found the tone of The God Delusion so smug and superior as to be unreadable.  I really wanted to enjoy it, or at least be either confirmed or challenged by it.  I have very much enjoyed interviews I have seen with Dawkins, and books by some of the other “new atheists” such as, say, Sam Harris, but I’m afraid the God Delusion leaves me cold.  I’ve seen all the arguments he uses put elsewhere, far more politely, and I really do think that some of those arguments are based on misunderstandings and/or assumptions.  I might have to save developing that comment for another post, though.  The fact that I disliked the book doesn’t mean that I don’t have a lot of sympathy for the sceptics out there (after all, they generally come across as considerably more sane and intelligent than a lot of Christians, at least on the internet!), but the smugness really is irritating.  The whole concept of calling yourself a “Bright” is part of the same superior attitude, and it’s really, really off-putting.

What’s so great about Christianity?, Dinesh D’Souza.  I thought that this was a good general reply to the likes of Dawkins et al.  I’m don’t necessarily think his arguments are all unanswerable, but in general he states them well, and brings some perhaps more honest perspective to some of the most common of the atheist/Christian arguments.  I really don’t think either side (I’m simplifying a bit here, I think it’s more complicated than two clear-cut ‘sides’) can win by arguing these points over and over, though.

Religion is for Fools, Bill Medley.  This little book is written in the form of a letter explaining the author’s investigation of religion and his eventual conversion to Christianity.  I’m not actually sure why the title is what it is, as the text doesn’t really reference the concept, however, it’s a concise little apologetic.  It doesn’t say anything world-changing and doesn’t have any new and startling insights, but is a nice primer for someone approaching Christianity for the first time.

Worship, Community, and the Triune God of Grace, James B. Torrance.  This was quite an important book for me.  As I said earlier, I come from a background which very much de-emphasised the role of Christ and the concept that his faith and love, not ours, is what saves anyone.  Combined with The Prodigal God, I’ve been pointed in the direction of exploring this basic idea, so central to Christianity but apparently misunderstood or forgotten by many or most.  I’m still not sure what to make of it, but you never know, maybe it’ll all make sense soon

The Mary Russell novels, Laurie R. King.  These books, starting with the The Beekeeper’s Apprentice, are a re-imagining of the world of Sherlock Holmes.  Normally I hate books where an author takes someone else’s world and characters, mostly because it is so rarely done in a way that is true to the original author’s ideas and intentions.  This series is a wonderful exception, with a Holmes who is true to his original character and developed into something more, and his supporting cast re-written in a sympathetic manner.  The central character is a hyper-intelligent Jewish feminist theologian, and whilst some of the ideas might be rather controversial to some it does provide some food for thought on the place of women in society and religion.  I haven’t read the whole series (I’ve read the first three plus Justice Hall, so I’ve skipped a couple and there’s a couple of later ones still to read) and they seem to be difficult to get in bookshops here these days, but Amazon.com is my friend in this regard.

Good Omens, Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman.  I am a huge Pratchett fan, and in fact it is probably his books that have done more than anything else to cause me to question the situation I was in than anything else (thanks Pterry!).  Whilst I know a lot of people who think highly of Gaiman as well, The only work of his that I’ve seen is the movie adaption of Stardust, which I thought was cute but by no means wonderful and without a single original concept to distinguish it from any other fantasy story.  Therefore I’ve not previously bothered to track down this book, but as I had lots of time on my hands I thought I’d give it a go.  I’m only part of the way through at the moment, but it’s wonderful!  Very, very funny.

Now that I’m back into study, I’ll have to cut back a bit.  I have so much reading for Psych this semester that my eyes are glazing just thinking about it, but as I’m now getting into specific topics rather than than first semester’s general overview, I’m also looking forward to getting into some things in a little more depth.  This semester includes a section on social psychology, which I’m particularly looking forward to.

On the sick list.

I’ve been far too lacking in motivation and attention span to update as much as I would like.  I found out this week that there’s a good reason for that – the return of a disease that saps energy and concentration, among other things, and which is likely to make me easily tired and perhaps a bit absent-minded for some months at least.

Oh well – it could be much worse.  Thank goodness for modern medicine!

Me, studying theology?

Yes, it’s true.  I’ve enrolled in a correspondence Introduction to the Bible class run by Moore Theological College, an Anglican college in Sydney.  I find this both mildly amusing and a bit surprising, given that I’m not even sure if I could be called a Christian.  This study is mostly a way for me to have a look at the Bible in a way which is a bit more consistent with mainstream Christian thinking than where I came from (which had a “Bible College” with study texts produced by elders almost exclusively, no library and no formal curriculum).  Who knows, I might even find whatever it is I lack when it comes to being a convinced believer, if anything.  Or not, as the case may be.  I don’t think it’s a waste of time, anyway – I find the commonly expressed opinion that theology is flawed as a study because it is inherently biased a bit dissatisfying.  Much as we like to think otherwise, we are always inherently biased on all things – why should studying religion be any different?  Most of the world has some sort of religious belief, so why not have a formal look at the one I feel a cultural link with?  Plus, I’m on semester break from my psychology course, so it’s something to fill my copious spare time (haha!)

My how you’ve grown, world.

I went to a birthday party for a friend from my old church today.  It was a surprisingly enjoyable experience, considering how awkward it could have been.  I left nearly a year ago and haven’t seen most of the people who were at the party since, although I did make a point of keeping in some kind of contact with a couple of close friends.

One of the reasons it was enjoyable was the knowledge that this group is no longer my entire world.  I am so much more!  I can love and care for my friends and family still there, but I no longer have to limit myself to them only, or feel guilty for having close friends and interests outside.