Here it is. I’ve read several responses and critiques and, as usual, Fred put it in a way that I never would have been able to. Money quote:

The authors affirm that they oppose abortion and same-sex marriage in order to demonstrate that they belong, to demonstrate that their voices are legitimate voices in their community, to demonstrate that they are “Evangelicals.” And what is the key, the touchstone, the Shibboleth for that demonstration? Two, and only two, political opinions. To be anti-abortion and anti-homosexuality may not be sufficient to demonstrate that one is an Evangelical, but it is necessary—far more necessary than any given theological or confessional belief.

The manifesto’s splendid language about reaching out to “the poor, the sick, the hungry, the oppressed, the socially despised, and being faithful stewards of creation and our fellow-creatures” belongs to a different category. Such opinions are acceptable, perhaps even admirable, but they are not Shibboleths that demonstrate one’s valid membership in the community.

Here, then, is the “Evangelical Manifesto.” It is an often persuasive and eloquent argument that political and cultural definitions of “Evangelical” are illegitimate. Yet even here—in the midst of that argument—the authors cannot avoid bowing to the demands of exactly those political and cultural definitions.

(HT: Andrew Sullivan)

“Nothing is more foreign to authentic monastic and “contemplative” tradition in the Church than a kind of gnosticism which would elevate the contemplative above the ordinary Christian by initiating him into a realm of esoteric knowledge and experience, delivering him from the ordinary struggles and sufferings of human existence, and elevating him to a privileged state among the spiritually pure, as if he were almost an angel, untouched by matter and passion, and no longer familiar with the economy of sacraments, charity and the Cross. The way of monastic prayer is not a subtle escape from the Christian economy of incarnation and redemption. It is a special way of following Christ, of sharing in his passion and resurrection and in his redemption of the world. For that very reason the dimensions of prayer in solitude are those of man’s ordinary anguish, his self-searching, his moments of nausea at his own vanity, falsity and capacity for betrayal. Far from establishing one in unassailable narcissistic security, the way of prayer brings us face to face with the sham and indignity of the false self that seeks to live for itself alone and to enjoy the “consolation of prayer” for it’s own sake. This “self” is pure illusion, and must end either in disgust or in madness.

On the other hand, we must admit that social life, so-called “worldly life,” in its own way promotes this illusory and narcissistic existence to the very limit. The curious state of alienation and confusion of man in modern society is perhaps more “bearable” because it is lived in common, with a multitude of distractions and escapes—and also with oppourtunities for fruitful action and genuine Christian self-forgetfulness. But underlying all life is the ground of doubt and self-questioning which sooner or later must bring us face to face with the ultimate meaning of our life. This self-questioning can never be without a certain existential “dread”—a sense of insecurity, of “lostness”, of exile, of sin. A sense that one has somehow been untrue not so much to abstract moral or social norms but to one’s own inmost truth. “Dread” in this sense is not simply a childish fear of retribution, or a naive guilt, a fear of violating taboos. It is the profound awareness that one is capable of ultimate bad faith with himself and with others: that one is living a lie.”

Thomas Merton—“Contemplative Prayer”

Here is a fascinating article from the Seattle Times. It highlights the breaking away of young evangelicals from the Republican strong man grip and into a political no man’s land. Shane Claiborne, Andy Crouch, Eugene Cho all contribute. There are some quotes in here that have to be making some of the old guard of the Religious Right a little nervous:

“I think it’s a new movement starting,” said Amy Archibald, 19, a sophomore at the evangelical school. “Most of us would never blindly follow the old Christian Right anymore. James Dobson has nothing to do with us. A lot of us are taking apart the issues, and thinking, ‘OK, well, [none of the candidates] fits what I’m looking for exactly.’ But if you’re going to vote, you’ve got to take your pros with your cons.”

and

“I just keep thinking, if Jesus were alive now, he wouldn’t necessarily be voting Republican.”

This may not be a shock to most of us but it’s an interesting look into how the political winds can change in the blink of an eye. In 2004 it seemed like we heard endless commentary on the influence of evangelical voters. What a difference three and a half years make? I think we can credit the second term of George Bush for this trend. If there is a silver lining to be found in his presidency at all, maybe this is it. We’ve endured the politics of fear and division to the point where we all are simply weary, even conservatives. It’s no wonder Obama is doing as well as he is. God have mercy on my fellow Arizonan, John McCain. I don’t think he’s gonna have a very enjoyable Fall.

“In my experience, liberalism creates suspicious people more than loving people. They begin by asking, “Who has the power here?” instead of, “How can I serve here?” Life is an issue to be informed about or fixed, but seldom a mystery to participate in—even in it;s broken state. That is probably the core difference between a mere liberal and a truly transformed individual.

Liberals need to find that rare abaility to live happily in a broken world, and still work for its reform. It is a work of art that I believe only spirituality can achieve. Mere ideology is not sufficient to the task. Behind every cynic I meet, there was once a youthful idealist who could not make his ideas work outside of his head. Liberals seem incapable of being a part of a tainted anything: food, institutions, histories, explanations, groups churches, and most expecially authority structures of any kind. Soon they themselves cannot lead—or follow good leaders, because they mistrust power and leadership itself. Yet, history makes it clear that good leadership is necessary for real change.

American liberalism, in my opinion, has no practical goal beyond maintaining personal and social freedom. “I choose, therefore I am” might be it’s operational belief system. The problem for the peace movement is that you cannot build any new social structures or enduring constituencies within this belief system. Such movements deconstruct from within, as the highly opinionated individualists quickly come into conflict with one another’s freedom to think. What they lack is a spiritual center, a Reference Point outside of the private “I”.

We religious folks would say they lack God, especially a God who gives source, pattern, and external goal. As a result, we each become our own source, pattern, and goal. The First Commandment was not accidentally the first, because if you don’t have “one God before you,” you will always become your own god. For this reason, it is difficult to build anything cohesive or compelling among liberal people. There is no authority beyond the individual opinion and recent research, and in fact, the very word “authority” is considered bad. Compare that to the true “liberalism” of a Martin Luther King, or a Dorothy Day, or a Cesar Chavez. They all had an authority beyond their own—and a Center outside of themselves.”

Richard Rohr—Contemplation in Action

If you’ve seen the amazing movie A Closer Walk, you’ll recognize Dr. Farmer. His story is incredible, inspiring, humbling. Playing in a rock band never seemed so lame.

“My immediate response to most situations is with reactions of attachment, defensiveness, judgment, control, and analysis. I am better at calculating than contemplating. Let’s admit that we all start there. The false self seems to have the “first gaze” at almost everything.

On my better days, when I am “open, undefended, and immediately present,” I can sometimes begin with a contemplative mind and heart. Often I can get there later and even end there, but it is usually a second gaze. The True Self seems to always be ridden and blinded by the defensive needs of the false self. It is an hour-by-hour battle, at least for me. I can see why all the spiritual traditions insist on daily prayer, in fact, morning, midday, evening, and before-we-go-to-bed prayer too! Otherwise, I can assume that I am back in the cruise control of small and personal self-interest, the pitiable and fragile “richard” self.

The first gaze is seldom compassionate. It is too busy weighing the feeling itself: “How will this affect me?” or “How does my self-image demand that I react to this?” or “How can I get back in control of this situation?” This leads us to an implosion, a self preoccupation that cannot enter into communion with the other or the moment. In other words, we first feel our feelings before we can relate to the situation and emotion of the other, and for the moment. It takes lots of practice. Maybe that is why many people even speak of their “spiritual practice”?”
—Richard Rohr, “Contemplation in Action”

Recently I’ve been thinking a great deal about the “False Self”. The Thomas Merton qoute that I posted a few posts ago has been ricocheting around inside of my being and it can sometimes lead to severe mind melt! Here’s an excerpt from that quote that reminds us of what we all contend with day in and day out:

“All sin starts from the assumption that my false self, the self that exists only in my own egocentric desires, is the fundamental reality of life to which everything else in the universe is ordered. Thus I use up my life in the desire for pleasures and the thirst for experiences, for power, honour, knowledge and love, to clothe this false self and construct its nothingness into something objectively real.”

So then this leads me to ask the question, “What am I using to clothe my false self?” What I do? What I own? Approval from others?

For example, I play drums in a rock band. This rock band is somewhat successful and enjoys the benefits of many loyal fans who come to our concerts, buy our t-shirts and listen to our albums. My false self is affirmed nightly by loud cheers and clapping hands. Yet, if I am consider that there is a very real distinction between my false self and my real (S)elf, then I need to somehow rearrange how I identify with myself. I need to ignore or shed the validation my false self receives from the value systems of this world. And while this aspect of my false self that is wrapped up in what I do is a very big hurdle, it is only one aspect. It’s daunting. I find myself wondering if whether or not even the “noble” things that I do are to simply bolster my false self. Do I do good deeds in order to consider myself that I am a good deed doer? The line between selfishness and selflessness becomes unclear.

And if this distinction is real, then what in me constitutes my true Self? Merton writes, “My false and private self is the one who wants to exist outside the reach of God’s will and God’s love.” If this is the case, then my true self must in some way not be me but God in me. Pastor Shane preached about this several weeks ago. In Romans 8, Paul paints a picture of two opposing forces within each of us: Flesh and Spirit. As Shane put it, ego and essence. Or maybe we can say it this way: our true identity is our identity in Christ. Everything else, what we do, what we own, what we want to achieve, the way we look, how hard our band rocks, how many people attend our churches…....it’s all a myth. We can only be in tune to God’s will and freely receive God’s unconditional love for us if we stop allowing the value systems of this world influence our motives. To shed the ego and the world’s framework in which the ego thrives is to come face to face with the love of God already in you. Your true Self.

Especially since our QB is keeping himself nice and relaxed. When I see this I just start chanting “FRANK THE TANK!”.

“What could you want that forgiveness cannot give? Do you want peace? Forgiveness offers it. Do you want happiness, a quiet mind, a certainty of purpose, and a sense of worth and beauty that transcends the world? Do you want care and safety, and the warmth of sure protection always? Do you want a quietness that cannot be disturbed, a gentleness that never can be hurt, a deep abiding comfort, and a rest so perfect it can never be upset?

All this forgiveness offers you and more. Forgiveness offers everything I want. Today I have accepted this as true. Today I’ve recieved the gifts of God.”

—Course in Miracles