Author Archive for the chaplain

Leaving Faith Behind

Published

on May 20, 2012

Last night I finished reading a book called Leaving Faith Behind, by Jeff Olsson, a former Anglican priest in Canada. As books go, it was a mediocre effort, as the writing was very dry throughout. Nevertheless, three sections stand out that are worth mentioning here.

First, I welcomed Olsson’s insights into the residential system whereby the Canadian government decreed that First Nations children would be forcibly removed from their homes and families so that they could be properly educated (read: Westernized, at best, or more correctly, brutalized and brainwashed). Churches often provided residential and educational services for these programs, and the Anglican Church of Canada was a major player in this process. This system ended fairly recently, in the mid-1990s (1996, if my memory is correct), so I’m not talking about ancient history here. Three of the issues that prompted Olsson to reconsider his beliefs were a) the extent of the guilt of Anglican priests in abusing the children in their care (abuses were physical, emotional, sexual – the whole gamut of possibilities was exhausted), b) the callous indifference of Church leaders for the damage they caused to several thousand children and families, and c) the Church’s overriding concern to evade fiscal, civil, or criminal consequences for the actions of its representatives.

Second, I appreciated Olsson’s discussion of the Canadian Anglican Church’s struggles to deal with homosexuality in a wholesome way. He provides a detailed chronicle of how the issue was handled within his former Church from the 1970s through the mid-2000s (the book was published in 2009). The issue stands at a stalemate now – no action is being taken so that neither liberal nor conservative wings of the church will have cause to leave the broader Anglican fellowship. Olsson also has some great insights into why remaining within the broader fellowship is so important to many believers.

Third, Olsson’s chapter about his childhood sense of wonder with the world around him, the loss of that wonder as a believer, and his regaining of it as a nonbeliever resonated powerfully with me. He described his childhood love of the Encyclopedias Americana, Canadiana, and Britannica, and how he nearly always found answers to his questions in those tomes. Then, as he became more immersed in his biblical studies, the encyclopedias gathered dust (as my Bibles do now). Finally, he recounts an outing with his nephew, in which they watched two groups of ants struggling with some caterpillars about some territory near a tree. During their discussion, he is struck by his nephew’s curiosity and wonder, which mirrored what his own had been like and prompted him to think deeply about how and why they had been lost. He’s since recovered both the curiosity and the wonder and revels in his newfound love of the world around him.

As I noted in this post’s opening paragraph, this book is not a riveting deconversion story. Many other more engaging, better written accounts are available. On the other hand, the Kindle edition of this book was only a couple of dollars, so I don’t feel like I wasted my money. People interested in glimpsing some of the history the Anglican Church of Canada may find it a worthwhile read.

– the chaplain

Filed under: atheism, deconversion, humanism, indoctrination, literature, rationalism, religion, science, society, spiritual abuse

End Times Double Feature

Published

the chaplain

on May 17, 2012

I haven’t posted in a while, but I’ll make up for it by offering a two-fer today. First up is an item from Talking Points Memo about Jim Bakker, who, apparently, is still alive and kicking, and swindling the gullible.

When I was a kid, I thought Jim Bakker looked creepy. Now I know enough to judge people by their deeds rather than their looks. My mature verdict: he’s a creep.

The second item is from The Washington Post.

Some may be relieved that the world isn’t going to end on December 21. Others may be disappointed that they won’t be able to have amazing End-of-The-World parties. Still others who were thinking about buying Jim Bakker’s End-of-the-World survival gear may be pleased that they can hang onto their cash a little bit longer. They can spend it on Christmas gifts instead. But I’m pretty sure that most people don’t give a damn about any of it. Except, perhaps, the Christmas gifts.

– the chaplain

Filed under: history, life, rationalism, religion, society

The Progressive United Methodist’s Dilemma

Published

the chaplain

on May 6, 2012

My cousin is a United Methodist minister in the midwestern USA, so she’s interested in what transpired at the General Conference of the United Methodist Church. Since she’s posted some items online about the General Conference, I’ve followed this year’s proceedings with a bit more interest than usual. The most controversial issue they considered – again – was gay rights. Unsurprisingly, the gays lost. Again. The thing that intrigues me is a report that much of the momentum for retaining the status quo came from conservative Africans:

Christianity in some form will continue in the USA for quite awhile yet – at least as long as people want or need to

a) avoid thinking about their own mortality,
b) avoid taking complete responsibility for their lives, and
c) exploit the people in categories a and b.

The church in the USA is declining, but it’s not going to disappear. Over time, however, it may become more like the church in Europe: there for those who want or need it, yet letting the rest of society get on with life. I could live with a church like that in the USA.

I wonder how Machiavellian progressive American Methodists are willing to be to get their way? The bottom line is that the conservatives in Africa depend heavily on progressive Americans with money to pay their bills. Will the people with the money use their economic influence to persuade the conservatives to loosen up? Will the progressives say, go along with us on this or lose us and our money?

I doubt it, although I could be wrong. Instead, I think the progressives will continue caving in to the conservatives for the foreseeable future for at least two reasons.

1. A conviction that extorting cooperation would be unethical.
2. Perceived guilt over past colonialism, exploitation, etc.

As it happens, I agree that extortion is unethical. I also know that it happens all the time. Sometimes it’s called persuasion. When it’s more overt, it’s called manipulation. I don’t think, however, that splitting off from conservatives with whom they disagree strongly would necessarily be extortion. Progressives shouldn’t overtly threaten to take the conservatives’ money away, but, if they’re serious about treating gays fairly, they have to come to a conclusion about their priorities. If they truly believe that gay rights matter, they will have to deal with the question of what matters more – solidarity with their denominational cohorts, or doing what they believe is right with regard to gays. As long as they continue choosing denominational solidarity, they will also continue marginalizing gays. They have, in short, an ethical dilemma. If progressive Methodists are serious about treating gays fairly, they may have to split from the conservative branch of their denomination. An unintended consequence of that action would be that their money would go with them.

Another possibility is that some would cite the ethical objection to a split, but the unspoken reason for retaining the status quo would be guilt. Some may recognize this, but others may never look deeply enough into their own minds and motivations to see it. And there may be some who would openly cite guilt as their reason for staying with the status quo. I don’t think there would be many of these, but there may be some.

The irony I see is this: had the progressives won the debate, I’d bet my next month’s salary that at least some conservative churches would be splitting away within a few months. Here’s another irony I see: the progressives at the conference, and as a whole, may not split away from the denomination, but individual progressives may split from their local churches. They may join another church in another denomination, or they may just join the ever-growing ranks of the unchurched. As that happens, the UM church in the USA may grow more conservative, but it will also grow smaller. I hope the same would also hold true for the rest of the conservative church in the USA. All of us would benefit if their influence on American foreign policy, education policy, science policy, etc., diminished in accordance with their numbers.

– the chaplain

Filed under: ethics, humanism, politics, rationalism, religion, secularism, society

On the American Presidential Campaign Trail

Published

the chaplain

on April 13, 2012

It’s been awhile since I’ve written anything political, so I’ll fix that now. Anyone who’s been following the American presidential election campaign knows that the Republicans have had a fair number of candidates enter and drop out of the race. Until today, Rick Santorum was the latest contender to suspend his campaign. In fairness to Santorum, I’ll admit that he got much farther than I ever expected he would; I suspect that says much more about the state of the Republican party these days than it does about Santorum’s candidacy. Not surprisingly, Andy Borowitz got the scoop on another suspended campaign:

I’m sure Mitt Romney is relieved that Charles Manson has decided to stay right where he is. The only question that remains for him now is this: what will it take to get Newt Gingrich to drop out of the race?

– the chaplain

Filed under: humor, politics, society

Notes On a Tutorial About Raising Dead People

Published

the chaplain

on April 11, 2012

I came across a weird little item a couple of days ago and have wondered whether I should let it go or write about it. As you can see, I’ve made my decision. The item of which I write is entitled, Raising Dead People: A Tutorial. Well, hell’s bells – who could resist reading that? Someone is going to teach others how to raise people from the dead? This, I’ve got to see.

So, I saw.

And I learned that the author of the tutorial hasn’t actually raised anyone from the dead. But she knows enough about it to teach others how to do it, or at least exhort them to go out and try it themselves. Here’s how she described her failed attempt to raise the dead:

So, we all dug deep and held some non-stop vigil prayer, asking God to raise him from the dead as a witness to His power in the community where we worked. As we announced our plans, every crazy intercessor with a shofar came out of the woodwork and we started to worship and to pray–mostly all the scriptures where people were raised from the dead.

We tried to raise our game and also leave room for the will of God. A tricky business–expecting the miraculous and leaving room for God. We put his name down to preach at his own “life celebration” we were planning–which would have been the coolest preach ever. But after four days of non-stop prayer and a lot of shofar blowing and prayer walking the morgue seven times, our friend never got up. He was as dead as dead is.

Maybe I misunderstood the title of the piece. Maybe I was mistaken to think that a piece entitled Raising Dead People: A Tutorial would actually be about successfully raising people from the dead, not about trying to do it and failing. However, since the author couldn’t report a successful attempt at dead raising, she ended up writing a tutorial about some other religious/spiritual nonsense and giving it a catchy, if slightly misleading, title (I say slightly because she did come back to the idea that people can be raised from the dead by other than medical means; besides, for this one time only, I’ll err on the side of generosity ). I should have known this would happen when she inserted this little bit into the paragraph that preceded the excerpt cited above:

Anyway, years ago, a bunch of our community started watching these DVDs of a guy who taught people how to raise the dead…. In our community at the time, there was a man who was diagnosed with a terminal illness. We were praying hard for his healing, but he succumbed to his disease. Because he was part of the group of people who had watched these videos and prayed that God would help us to at least try to raise our expectations of what He could do…

Did you catch the last bit? Notice how the goalposts were moved. We’re no longer talking about positively raising people from the dead. Now we’re talking about merely raising expectations that god could empower believers to raise the dead. If he chose to do so.

The author excused her failure with this caveat: The good news is that the guy who teaches the videos said that it wasn’t until he prayed for the seventh dead guy, that it worked. It took perseverance and a whole lot of humility.

Oh. man! I’ve got to hand it to the author of the videos! He scammed this lady and her friends beautifully. His schtick was basically, if at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. And again. And yet again. That’s the perseverance part and it can actually be measured. One can count the number of attempts one makes to do something until one either succeeds or gives up. If one never succeeds, maybe one should have tried just one more time and he or she would have hit pay dirt. But, the person quit too early, so now we’ll never know. Even more cleverly, the formula for successful dead raising doesn’t end with a quantitative measure. Oh, no. It’s accompanied by something that can’t be measured, but can always be dredged up as the real reason for continued failure – lack of humility. Presumably, one may fail to raise the dead once, twice, seven times, seventy times seven times, whatever, and never succeed and believers will never know if the problem is that he or she hasn’t made a sufficient number of attempts, or that the person just isn’t humble enough to succeed. It’s a given that believers won’t consider the ~~possibility~~ probability that prayer and religious rituals will never work because no gods are paying attention to them.

I wish I could watch the DVDs myself and see this con artist in action, but I can’t. The author of the tutorial didn’t provide any information about them. No link to a website. No DVD titles. Not even a name for this miracle working “guy who taught people how to raise the dead.” So, if you want to check her sources, you’ll have to do some digging on your own. If you find them, let me know. While you search, I’ll be walking the dogs (or washing my hair or something. Honestly, if I had seen videos like these, I sure as hell would have noted the titles, or at least the name of the guy! That’s more than a minor oversight, if you ask me.).

If you’re interested in reading the rest of what the tutorial author wrote, go right to her piece. She wrote some more interesting stuff, including an admission that she’s crazy for trying to raise dead people. What you won’t find is a surefire recipe for raising dead people to life. She doesn’t have it. My guess is, she never will.

– the chaplain

Filed under: rationalism, religion, science, society, spiritual abuse

An Evolutionary Tale

Published

the chaplain

on March 31, 2012

When cell phones were first released, I was not the least bit interested in having one. In fact, I actively resisted the idea. I didn’t want to be at every Tom, Dick & Harry’s beck and call at all hours of the day or night. I changed my mind when I got a job that required a commute of 50+ miles every day. I realized that if my car ever broke down, I’d need a cell phone. The day came when the car broke down (two blown tires and a busted wheel in one hell of a pothole), and I needed a cell phone. Fortunately, by that time I’d acquired a basic model and was able to call for help.

Having taken the step of getting a basic cell phone that sent and received phone calls, I insisted for years that I didn’t need a phone with any other bells and whistles. I didn’t want a phone for sending and receiving emails – I had computers for that. Nor did I want a phone that told me the weather forecast, or anything else that traditional phones had never done. I wanted a phone that was just a phone.

Then, a little over a year ago, I decided I wanted to access the Internet from my cell phone. And maybe check my email sometimes. I have no idea why I suddenly wanted to do those things. I just did. Unexpectedly. Without any warning. As I checked into upgrading my phone, I discovered that it would cost just a tad more to upgrade to an iPhone than it would to add those features to my existing phone. So, I got an iPhone.

Ah, the iPhone. I use it to make and receive phone calls. Sometimes. More often, I use it to send text messages to family and friends. Even more often, I use it to read the news, usually in the morning as I eat oatmeal and sip tea. And check the weather forecast. And upload recipes. And make shopping lists and keep my calendar and read e-books and write blog posts (like this one) and take photos and track my nutrition and exercise and follow maps and read blogs and look up information on google and wikipedia and listen to music and watch videos… In short, I use my cell phone to do a whole lot more than make and receive phone calls. It’s probably the most indispensable tool I own. I’ve evolved 180 degrees from a cell phone Luddite to a cell phone junkie. My dependence on my phone has gotten so complete that I probably should classify it as an addiction. If I do that, the inevitable next step will be joining a support group: iPhones Anonymous…

I bet there’s an app for that.

– the chaplain

Filed under: humor, life, technology

Land of the Free, Home of the Obese

Published

the chaplain

on March 22, 2012

Americans love to believe we’re number one. It’s probably a safe bet to say that one category for which that’s true is obesity. And we’re getting the over-sized ambulances to prove it:

Does anyone besides me find this embarrassing?

– the chaplain

Filed under: society

Bumper Sticker Sighting

Published

the chaplain

on March 5, 2012

I saw this bumper sticker as I drove to work this morning:

That good old time religion – still using the same old carrot-and-stick to lure people into its clutches.

– the chaplain

Filed under: humor, religion

Freaky Friday Finds

Published

the chaplain

on March 2, 2012

Here are some of the freaky things I found on the Internet recently.

My first entry comes from the Department of Woo:

Just. Gag. Me. Now. With. Lots. Of. Saccharine.

My second entry comes from another desk at the Department of Woo (it’s a very large department):

The only sound thing about theology is that theologians are often good at making noise. Loud, rude noise.

And my final entry comes from the Department of Prudish Busybodies (which is nearly as large as the woo department):

Prudence’s response was much more temperate and prudent than mine would have been. That’s probably why she’s Prudence and I’m not.

That’s enough freakiness for one day. I’m going to enjoy my weekend now.

– the chaplain

Filed under: humanism, humor, life, religion, sex, society

Woo Central, aka, Yahoo! News

Published

the chaplain

on February 29, 2012

Yahoo! News posted an interesting little item recently:

The bit that caught my attention was this:

The photo has surfaced on several Mayan doomsday discussion forums. But was the light beam a sign from the gods — a warning about Dec. 21, 2012, the date that marks the end of the Mayan calendar cycle, and when some people fear the world will end? Or is it simply the result of an iPhone glitch?

According to Jonathon Hill, a research technician and mission planner at the Mars Space Flight Facility at Arizona State University, which operates many of the cameras used during NASA’s Mars missions, it is almost definitely the latter.

“Almost definitely?” Seriously? An ASU big shot thinks there’s room for doubt on this “question?” The explanation of the physics behind the image doesn’t leave ~~much~~ room for doubt. But, in the United States of Jesustan, neither reporters nor scientists dare hint, let alone say outright, that goddidit is not a good answer to any question. Nope. Fair and balanced reporting in the USA requires that religion almost always gets a free pass. In this case, rather than calling out the religious interpretation for the bullshit it is, the reporter just ignored it politely. Thus, religion wasn’t promoted, but it wasn’t criticized either. That’ not good reporting. It’s not even “fair and balanced” reporting. It’s simply allowing people to read the story and retain unchallenged the assumptions with which they began. News reports like this allow Americans to remain only marginally better informed than illiterate peasants. They are a large part of the reason our society is on a fast track to cultural and economic irrelevance.

Welcome to Jesustan. It’s a hell of a place.

Filed under: rationalism, science, society

3 Approaches to Religion – An Illustrated Post

Published

the chaplain

on February 27, 2012

The first illustration shows how the gullible, vulnerable and indoctrinated view their dogma:

The second approach illustrates a pragmatic approach. This is better than the first one, and it’s tempting sometimes, but it can render one vulnerable to hucksterism and manipulation (see first illustration):

The third approach is the one I recommend – read carefully and widely, and think critically about everything you read:

Thus endeth today’s illustrated sermon.

P.S. – the sermon applies to politics too.

– the chaplain

Filed under: deconversion, humor, indoctrination, philosophy, rationalism, religion

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Published

the chaplain

on February 8, 2012

This picture paints more than 1,000 words about Christian superstition.

And I’ve busted another Irony Meter.

– the chaplain

Filed under: humor, religion

…In Which I Defend Muslims

Published

the chaplain

on February 4, 2012

Yes, you read that title correctly. Today, I participated in a brief but bizarre conversation in which I defended Muslims. Here’s the story.

A co-worker (a conservative, evangelical Christian) was praising the mechanic who recently serviced his car. After reciting a fairly lengthy list of services rendered and the incredibly low prices he was charged for those services, he paused for a second or two, looked astonished, and said in a voice full of wonder, “And he was a Muslim!”

I immediately said, “What does that have to do with anything?”

He responded, “Of all people, you think they’d be the least likely to be like that.”

I said, with astonishment, “There are something like a billion Muslims in the world and most of them are not terrorists. The vast majority of them are good, honest people.”

When he looked at me like I’d grown a second nose, I said, “Imagine a group of Muslims sitting together at lunch – like we are – talking about a business transaction similar to yours. Now imagine the speaker ending his story by saying, “And he was a Christian!”

The guy sitting next to the conservative Christian chuckled and said, “Touche.”

The conservative Christian grinned sheepishly and said, “Yeah, I see your point.”

Will the conservative Christian change his mind about Muslims? Probably not very much. He’ll continue believing they’re all going to hell because they don’t worship the right deity. But maybe the next time he does business with a Muslim he won’t be so astonished when his religious, cultural and ethnic prejudices are disconfirmed.

– the chaplain

Filed under: prejudice

The Great Debate: Football or Baseball?

Published

the chaplain

on February 1, 2012

With the Super Bowl fast approaching, it’s time to examine the critical question of which sport is superior – football or baseball. Since this is a significant matter, I’ve enlisted two experts to assist us in our deliberations.

First, Bill Maher will present his point of view.

Next, George Carlin will give us another perspective.

Now, it’s time for you to decide. Which do you prefer, football or baseball?

– the chaplain

Filed under: politics, society, sports

Religious Attitudes Poll

Published

the chaplain

on January 25, 2012

Vanity Fair/60 Minutes recently conducted a poll that yielded some interesting results:

If some religious believers think the world would be better off with no religion, shouldn’t they just quit and do their bit to make the world a better place?

– the chaplain

Filed under: religion

Roe v. Wade – 39 Years Later

Published

the chaplain

on January 24, 2012

Check out the headline of an item I read on Sparkpeople this morning:

The article goes on to state:

Since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion in 1973, opponents have questioned the safety of medical procedures used to terminate pregnancy. Now, a new study contends that having a legal abortion is safer than carrying a baby to term.

The risk of death associated with a full-term pregnancy and delivery is 8.8 deaths per 100,000, while the risk of death linked to legal abortion is 0.6 deaths per 100,000 women, according to the study. That means a woman carrying a baby to term is 14 times more likely to die than a woman who chooses to have a legal abortion, the study finds.

- snip -

Grimes and his colleagues had several reasons for undertaking the study, published in the February issue of Obstetrics & Gynecology. One is that medical abortion, in which a woman can take a pill early in pregnancy, instead of surgical abortion, “has changed the landscape of abortion, and the mortality information needed to be updated.”

Another reason is that in many states, women are given information before getting an abortion. “There’s been a proliferation of these women’s-right-to-know pamphlets, and some of them are misleading, if not downright incorrect or patently wrong,” Grimes said.

- snip -

Dr. Donna Harrison, director of research and public policy at the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, disagreed with the authors’ conclusions.

- snip -

Dr. Mitchell Creinin, professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, Davis, said that pregnant women considering their options “are often scared by the rhetoric.”

“If a state is going to feel a responsibility to be involved in this private matter, we need to ensure that the material is factual,” said Creinin, who wrote an accompanying editorial in the same issue of the journal. “If it comes from the state or the government, people assume it’s true,” he added.

It’s no secret that I support women’s rights to choose what’s best for themselves reproductively, socially and economically. Neither you, nor I, nor any government officials or agencies have any business regulating and interfering in the intimate details of people’s lives. The decision to have – or not have – an abortion is one of the most serious decisions a woman may ever make. And I honestly don’t know if I could have made that choice myself. Fortunately for me, I never had to find out. But, many women are not as fortunate as I. They must make this decision and they need accurate information to do so. They also need emotional and practical support before, during and after the decision – either to abort or carry to term – has been made and carried through. What they don’t need is self-righteous busybodies calling them criminals or sinners or sluts or any other foul names. What they don’t need is people telling them they can’t decide for themselves because busybodies with their own agendas (religious or otherwise) have already made the decision for them. The age of paternalism passed a long time ago in most developed countries. It’s time for the USA to catch up with its peers and start showing equal respect for all of its citizens too.

– the chaplain

Filed under: abortion, ethics, politics, rationalism, science, society, women's rights