Where is the True Power?

Recently, I heard the sad news that the politics of J.D. Vance, the Republican candidate for U.S. Vice-President, was shaped by The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien.  J.K. Granberg-Michaelson noted in his essay that, on hearing this, his reaction was, “JD Vance doesn’t get to claim The Lord of the Rings.”

Like that writer, I have been an almost lifelong fan of Tolkien’s trilogy of the imagined Middle-Earth and his other works.  It is not a surprise that Vance and other members of the right wing Maga hoard would glom onto this epic tale of the battle between good and evil.  It is very possible to have a superficial understanding of that as a battle between the quasi-European force of good represented by the loveable Hobbit sand blond beautiful elves and even the cave dwelling dwarfs who rallied to defeat the (non-white) dark forces of monsters lead by the ultimate evil of Sauron who had gone to the dark side of the force – to use an analogy from a different imagined world. 

Tolkien, in his epic work, depicts the struggle to resist the temptation to succumb to temptation to use ultimate power to defeat the forces of evil.  This is a theme that was also explored by the other members of the famous Oxford group of writers, the Inklings – including C.S. Lewis and Charles Williams - in their works such as the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (Lewis) and Descent into Hell (Williams). 

In the Lord of the Rings, the humble Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins is the one selected to take the ring of ultimate power to be destroyed in Mount Doom.  He was faithful in not succumbing to the temptation to use that power for his own purposes until the very end when it is his shadow (to use Jung’s term) the despised and conflicted Gollum. who, on briefly regaining the ring, meets his destruction along with the ring of power in the eternal fires of Mount Doom. 

Many, but not exclusively, on the right of politics fail to have eyes to see the message in the Lord of the Rings and other works by the Inklings, that ultimately power cannot be defeated by using that power even if with the best of intentions.  Granberg-Michaelson noted that, “Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), even used The Lord of the Rings as late as 2006 to endorse a continued U.S. presence in Iraq.”  More recently, Republican politician Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) recently declared in a statement that exposed a shocking ignorance of basic Christian doctrine, at a “Christian” conference no less, “Jesus didn’t have enough AR-15 rifles to “keep his government from killing him.”  Similarly, Donald Trump jr. recently declared, “We’ve turned the other cheek, and I understand, sort of, the biblical reference — I understand the mentality — but it’s gotten us nothing.”

This, of course, misses the basic message of the crucifixion and Christianity.  As Jesus told Pilot:

My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my followers would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not from here.

Tolkien and the other Inklings were wrestling mightily with the all-too human temptation to want to use the same weapons used by evil to defeat the forces of evil.  They have shown us brilliantly that this does not work in the Kingdom that Jesus Christ proclaimed.  As much as it goes against our basic instincts, we must turn the other cheek, and go the second mile and, yes, even love our enemies.  That will be a true blessing on our journey.

  

Having Ears to Listen and Hear

 

One of my favourite radio programs is This American Life on National Public Radio in the U.S.  I was listening to an episode from their archives last week about how people change their minds. 

The program reported on the rather surprising results of an experiment in which had canvassers who went door-to-door and spent some time talking to people about controversial issues such as same-sex-marriage and abortion.  The results were quite amazing as they showed that after a relatively short period of time the people interviewed changed their minds on the issue.  More surprising is that the change remained over a significant time period i.e. it was not just momentary.  If you are interested in listening to the program here is the link: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/555/the-incredible-rarity-of-changing-your-mind.

One of the key factors in this result that they identified was that the interviewers had to be identified with the issue e.g. a woman who had an abortion of someone who was self-identified as LGBT.  Another significant factor that was identified is that people do not change their beliefs based on facts and data.  Where people change their minds is on the level of the gut; of visceral reactions; of emotions; of feelings (which by the way are not the same as emotions). 

They found that the most important thing that the interviewer could do in this process was to stop telling people things and to listen.  The interviewer needed to let them talk about their own lives and tell their own stories.  I would qualify that this doesn’t quite match the first finding i.e. that the interviewer needed to be identified with the issue personally.  Their experience was important. However, that information needed to be revealed in the course of the interview in context of the discussion.   The focus needed to be on the experience of the person being interviewed.

These findings were quite unexpected and surprising because they completely overturned the expectation and common wisdom held by experts in the field.  I am wondering how these findings can be applied to that thing which Anglicans are particularly struggling with these days as we increasingly find ourselves out of step with our culture which is increasingly secular and disconnected with anything religious; That thing is evangelism.  Today Anglicans particularly do not have experience in evangelism; in spreading the Good News of Jesus Christ.  Many other denominations have had greater experience and success in this. It was not something which, I must admit, I am very comfortable with and did not receive any training specifically on how to evangelize in school.  However, as the number of people in the pews dwindle; as our parishioners get older; and as more and more churches close it is something we need to turn our attention to.  It is not just a case of survival as the Anglican Church in Canada and perhaps all the Western world.  It is also an imperative as Christians.  We are called to spread the Good News of Jesus Christ to the world.

I must qualify the above by saying that I am not comfortable about evangelization when I think of it in the traditional way of thinking about evangelization.  The picture I have is of the T.V. evangelist who would play on the audience’s fears and desires and prejudices, or the people at the door who ask if I have been saved or born again.  That is key to the issue and where it intersects with the findings discussed in that radio program.  We need to redefine what evangelism means.  We need to share the Good News by approaching people where they are and listening to their experience.  We also need to be able to share our stories and how being an Anglican is part (hopefully an important part) of our stories as Christians. 

Actually, that is pretty much what I do as a Spiritual Director.  I listen to the experience and stories of my directees and share how my experience has helped me to have a closer relationship with God.  The need for listening is even more vital than when this program was undertaken.  Our society is dividing more and more into camps in which the other side is the enemy if not worse.  The American movie Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner was about a black man being engaged to the parents of a white woman.  Today, the worst thing that could happen in the States is probably a Republican or Democrat being introduced to a family as the fiancé of the opposite political persuasion.  Canada is not that far down that road but there are signs it is heading in the same direction e.g. the Freedom Convoy of a couple of years ago. 

This week I invite you to reflect on your experience of being a person connected to organized religion  or as a spiritual person unconnected to organized religion and how that has affected your life.  What would you say to share that with someone you just met?  Better yet how would you listen with ears to hear to someone who does not share that experience.

Blessings on your journey.

Holy Humour

A couple of weeks ago, I quoted from the movie The Life of Brian in my sermon.  Specifically,” It reminded me of that wonderful scene from Monty Python’s The Life of Brian, where someone listening to Jesus deliver the Sermon of the Mount asked the person beside him, ‘what did he say, was it blessed are the cheesemakers.  That doesn’t sound right.  Why should the cheesemakers be blessed?  But I guess that’s what he said.”  That is the first time I have done that i.e. quote form the Life of Brian, but it probably shouldn’t be the last.

I did this in the context of preaching on the parable in the Gospel of Luke in which Jesus seems to be commending the dishonest steward who cheats his master.  One possibility in understanding this puzzling parable is that people did not hear Jesus correctly.  I must admit that this was probably something of a stretch, but it brings up the issue of what the role is of humor in religion. 

Often the religious among us take everything about religion and theology deadly seriously.  There are, of course, many things about religion that should be taken seriously – deadly or otherwise.  Many of us believe that we are dealing with issues of salvation and matters of life and death and eternity.  There is no account of Jesus laughing in the bible.  He did weep a few times, but not laughter that was recorded.  A great example of people taking religion and themselves too seriously is the famous debate about the Life of Brian between two Pythons (of the Monty variety) on one side and Malcolm Muggeridge and the C. of E. Bishop of Suffolk on the other hand.  The two representatives of religion – and I must note specifically Christianity – insisted that this was an attack on Jesus Christ despite all protests that it was not about Jesus but about Brian who was mistaken for the Messiah.  They considered the movie the height – or rather depth – of low humor making jokes at the expense of something essential to humanity.  It was on reflection rather a sad and mistaken view of the movie in my view and shows the nee for some to just lighten up form G’d's sake.

Lorna and I have seen the movie in the past and decided to obtain our own copy of the DVD (I know we are technology dinosaurs)  which we recently watched and enjoyed immensely.  The humor in it is, admittedly, sometimes low as British humor can be.  But it is a triumph of satire on the follies and foibles of people who look for something to believe in, in all the wrong places and in the wrong ways.  One of the many wonderful scenes in the movie has Brian speaking to the crown outside his house.  He tells them, “You’ve got it all wrong.  You’ve got to think for yourself.  You are all individuals.”  The crowd responds in unison, “Yes we’re all individuals.”  Brian responds, “You’ve all different.”  The crowd in turn replies, “yes, we’re all different.”  One lone voice, “I’m not.”  Brian tries again, “You’ve all got to work it out for yourself.” The crowd in unison, “We’ve got to work it out for ourselves.”  Thank God that we all got the point and don’t have the mass appeals of demigods today.

  I realize that this missive on Holy Humour has been rather serious, so let me give you an old joke about Anglicans.  Question - how many Anglicans does it take to change a light bulb.  Answer – we don’t change, we’re Anglicans and anyway that is a memorial light bulb so we can’t replace it. 

So, what then do we make of Holy Humour?  Can there be true humor in such a serious thing as religion?  One author who explores this is Helen Luke in her collection uof essays, The Laughter at the Heart of Things.  One commentary I came upon summarizes the essence of what Luke is saying very well:

What is at the heart of the matter, according to Helen Luke, is a sense of proportion.  Luke quotes T.S. Eliot and notes that, “Eliot is, expressing here (in the quote) the identity of a sense of humour with the sense of proportion and the humility that this engenders”.  What is at the heart of things the joy of seeing disproportion restored to proportion.

At bottom, the humour is getting us in touch with joy – the joy of being part of God’s creation.  After all, to quote a group of musical religious sister – the Medical ones, joy is like the rain.  Perhaps those are raindrops on roses to bring in another song. 

May you be blessed with holy humour on your journey.  Remember joy is a serious matter not to be taken too lightly – too much of the time.  

 

Suffer the Little Children

Lorna and I spend our summers at our cottage in Prince Edward Island.  We attend the little Anglican church. St. Alban the Martyr in the town closest to us, Souris as well as St. Georges, in Montague which is somewhat further away.  I assist at these churches as there is only a part time priest available for both churches.

Last Sunday, I decided that the hymns would be an all-children’s hymn service – I also provide the music, playing my guitar.  Both churches share a similar condition with many small Anglican churches these days having an absence of children in attendance.  As a result, there has been a lack of the children’s hymns that many of us grew up with in our services.  So, I thought, why not have a service with all the hymns we were familiar with.  Now, with the caveat that I was not raised in the Anglican church – being United Church by birth and upbringing, I chose hymns from our hymn book which I grew up singing and was pretty sure those in attendance would also know. Of course, I had the benefit of my unofficial adviser, my wife Lorna, who is a lifelong Anglican.  Here are the hymns which we sang:

Opening hymn     This is My Father’s World

Gospel Hymn       Jesus Loves Me (this I know)

Offertory Hymn   Can a Little Child Like Me (thank the Father fittingly)

Closing Hymn       When He Cometh (to make up his jewels)

I believe the hymns were well received – our small group sang them with energy and seemed to enjoy them.  St. Augustine is credited with the saying, “he who sings prays twice.”  I believe that is true as music touches a part of ourselves, we often aren’t aware of.  The hymns and other music we heard and sang as children connect with that part on an even deeper level.  They are there waiting to be accessed even though they are often neglected as adults. 

If we look at the theology contained in those hymns there is a lot which would be valuable to guide us as adults.  If we can truly live as if this is not our world to do with as we want and are only stewards of a world which has been created, we would not have the ecological crisis of Global warming.  If we truly understood that Jesus does love us and offers us God’s grace unconditionally, our lives would be better for it.  If we believed that we need to thank God for all God has given us, we would be better people.  We are God’s precious jewels, His loved and His own.

Lorna also noted that many children; s hymns speak of being with God when we die e.g. “when at last I come to die, take me home with thee on high.”  However, it did not fill her with morbid thoughts of death.  She found it rather comforting.  I must admit that I didn’t give that much thought as a child but now that I am much closer to the end than the beginning, I do find the thought quite comforting.

On your journey, I invite you to consider the hymns or other music that have filled your life.  If you were not blessed to have hymns in your life as a child, is there music which blesses you today.