As we sit at the seventh anniverary of 9/11, I simply link to this engaging book review from the Economist, August 23rd issue. It's the review of two books from two friends, one a Palestinian, the other an Israeli. The theme however, is music and its unifying power. I think it a fitting homage to the victims of those tragic attacks that in the midst of our remembering, we also look ahead to building anew.

I believe that lasting peace is found in Christ alone; I also believe that we are called to be culture makers (following the theme of Crouch's book which I've been slowly reviewing here) and this review has some pertinent ideas for culture making:

"We live in a world in which different voices -- different expressions of political will and behavioral norms -- collide and compete. Some struggle to be heard; others seem to be continuously present. In music we have the perfect model of contrasting voices working together harmoniously."

The review itself is well worth a read.

Excelsior
Russell

Culture Making Ch 4 -- Cultivtion and Creation

I truly enjoyed the film Tortilla Soup. Hector Alizondo plays the role of a great chef whose wife has died. Every Sunday, he and his three adult daughters gather for a home-cooked meal. The film dwells on shots of the selections of ingredients and preparation of food .... and we see that this family is bond together by the regular routines of preparation and enjoyment of a great meal.

Andy Crouch evoked memories of that film in this chapter on Cultivation and Creation. He makes the argument that the only way to change culture is to make new culture that displaces it. He gives the example of homemade chili. His kids may protest against it now, but with the consistent creation of it, he will teach them that preparation of food is a delight and a valuable thing. They may make their own recipies as a way of doing something else, anything else other than chili, but they still will have been taught the value of making their own meals.

Crouch thinks through the other stances toward culture in relation to Creation and Cultivation:

condemning culture: does very little... that which is condemned is still there. The show goes on unless an alternative is offered.

Critiquing culture: This looks for redeeming qulaities. It may shape the framework of some, but it only has lasting value if someone creates new culture in response (I'm reminded of a drama workshop I attended years ago taught by Charlie and Ruth Jones. Charlie opened with a talk about TS Eliot, the great poet who decided that his literary talents were better used in writing essays about the culture. Today, nobody reads the essays, but everyone still has to study The Waste Land in some literature class in their career. The illustration holds... analysis has value....but it's lasting value lies in what is done with the analysis. However, Eliots Criticism did arouse some pretty lasting effects.... that perhaps is a subject for a different article)

Copying culture: creation of a subculture is OK and something of a refuge for those in the subculture, but does little to touch those outside the subculture.

Consuming culture: Use the power of the purse to shape culture. Crouch uses the example of Barbara Nicolosi's "othercott" against The DaVinci Code. The idea wasn't to boycott going to movies the weekend of the opening of the lackluster film adaptation of Dan Brown's controversial thriller. Rather, the idea was to go see anything but the DaVinci Code. If Hollywood understands things in terms of dollars and cents, then in addition to punishing objectionable fare, positive and healthy fare needs to be rewarded. Crouch shows how this is a good idea, but on the aggregate scale, the kinds of numbers required to really make a difference are staggering.

Culture Making, by contrast, requires a decision to participate in the cultural tradition of which we are a part. This begins with Cultivation .... learning the tradition. It begins with the habits of conserving the true, the good, and the beautiful in our tradition and teaching them to the next generation. “One who cultivates tries to create the most fertile conditions for good things to survive and thrive.” (75)

Crouch points out that disciplines are simply systematic methods of cultivation. The pianist running through scales. The basketball player practicing free throws. The writer sitting down for his daily 30 minutes of writing. The disciplines we do on the day in day out, week in week out basis are the things that prepare fertile soil for rich and deep culture making.

This is one of the reasons Tammy and I have chosen to put our children in a private school centered on the Classical model. Yes, our children will spend much of their elementary school years memorizing and packing facts into their heads (fortunately they memorize using fun methods like songs, chants, body motion, and a variety of other methodologies).... but the disciplines of learning all these things will become a deep well from which they can draw in later years. Of course, I don't object to christians sending their children to public schools....there are great public schools here in Cincinnati, and many of our congregation members are public school teachers. However, this was a decision that was right for our family.

Another example....I somtimes get some of our members who say "you must read a lot, how do you find time to read all these books?" Admittedly, I do read a lot. However, I've been reading a lot for over 20 years. Just because I refer to a book (or a film) in a sermon, that doesn't mean that I was reading that particular book last week. Over a couple of decades, I've built up a deep well of knowledge about literature, history, and the arts. I'm not particularly more clever than anyone else, I've just been doing serious study for a long time.... and I've been archiving information in notes and journals so that I can come back to it later. This is just a basic discipline that cultivates the mind.

“So underneath almost every act of culture making we find countless small acts of culture keeping. That is why the good screenwriter has first watched a thousand movies; why the surgeon who pioneers a new technique has first performed a thousand routine surgeries; and why the investor who provides funds to the next startup has studied a thousand balance sheets. Cultural creativity requires cultural maturity. Someday my own children will undoubtedly cook me a wonderful meal – but by that time, they will also have learned to love chili. With any luck, they will be both culture keepers and culture makers – both cultivators and creators. And then they will be prepared to both conserve culture at its best and change it for the better by offering the world something new.” (77)

However Crouch points out....that is only the first step. Cultivation only sets the conditions. Then there comes the act of Creation. And here, unfortunately, Crouch ends the chapter. Of course he comes back to the call to create, but I would have liked more.

I would have liked more on the fears that are involved in creating. Creating seems to be a tremendous act of ego.... and it is terrifying. Bayles and Orland, in their work Art and Fear deal with this very issue. They talk about the fear of not being able to make the art we create match the art that is in our head. The materials are never as supple as we hope they'll be. They never fully respond the way we want. Bayles tells the story of learning to play the piano: After a few months practice he moaned to his teacher “but I can hear the music so much better in my head than in can get out of my fingers.” To which the master replied “What makes you think that ever changes?” (14-15)

Bayles and Orland also tell this most revealing story:
A ceramics teacher divided his class into two groups – those on the left would be graded on the quantity of the work they produced, those on the right solely on the quality of the work. The second group only had to produce one pot, but it had to be perfect to get an A. “Well, came grading time and a curious fact emerged: the works of highest quality were all produced by the group being graded for quantity. It seems that while the quantity group was busily churning out piles of work – and learning from their mistakes – the “quality” group had sat theorizing about perfection, and in the end had little more to show for their efforts than grandiose theories and a pile of dead clay.” (29)

In other words, a significant part of culture making....of the cultivation process itself....is in doing. We need to be producing.

So I ask ... what are you working on. What creative disciplines (beyond the spiritual disciplines) have you developed?

Soli Deo Gloria
Russell

Culture Making Ch 3 -- Teardowns, technology, and change

I often judge the quality of a nonfiction book by it's capacity to spark within me those "oh yeah" moments of syncrhonicity ... when I suddenly see connections with life and other readings that I've done (thought perhaps, that quality is more a judgment of my mental state at the time, but that is another topic entirely).

Reading chapter 3 of Crouch's Culture Making sent off fireworks of connections in my mind. He begins by talking about how change happens.... that change is unavoidable. Sometimes change is subtle in the form of Maintenance (a new coat of paint in the room, new roof, new strings for the guitar).... sometimes it comes in the form of tearing down something ... the tearing down of something may represent a cultural failure. Crouch uses the ideas of Stuart Brand (How Buildings Learn, The Clock of the Long Now) to show that the longer it takes to change something, the more lasting the impact is.

For instance, fashion is ephermeral. This year, more modest clothes are in. Next year it will be shorter skirts and outlandish ties. Shaping the world of fashion may not have much impact. We still live with the impact of the political changes that took place in the late 18th century; however the movement from wigs and breeches to loose hair and pantaloons is pretty irrelevant to us.

What of revolutions? Even revolutions are the product of a buildup of centuries of ideas and social tensions. They don't happen overnight. In one sense, 9/11 began with the crusades and the Barbary Pirates, and Charles Martel, and a host of other tensions building up over centuries. The American revolution began with the Magna Carta and the British Civil War and the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and centuries of political thought.

And even thought revolutions are quick, they're usually more destructive than creative. “And like earthquakes, revolutions are much better at destroying than building. There is an important asymmetry here, whose roots go all the way down to the laws of physics: It is possible to change things quickly for the worse. It only took two hours after the collision between a 767 and the South Tower of the World Trade Center to destroy it. But no one can build the World Trade Center in two hours. The only thing you can do with Rome in a day is burn it.” (58). I'm reminded of John Adams, who was worried by Tom Paine's Common Sense “the writer has a better hand at pulling down than building.” (David McCullough biography, 97). So, Adams in 1775 began writing his Thoughts on Government, already working on building the new government, before the revolution even began. His work became foundation during the Constitutional convention in 1787, over 20 years later. The point is this...that we ought be very cautious in our ardency for radical change....radical change rarely helps. The American Revolution was helped by geniuses who knew how to build and thus tempered the radicals who wanted to watch things burn.

I think Crouch would have benefitted from looking at the economics of this, however. In a sense, to create anything, we must destroy something. To make omlettes, we must break eggs. To make guitars and violins, we need to cut down some trees and we need to shape raw materials into varnish and stain and glue. The concept of the opportunity cost is at play here.... to do something, we must sacrifice the opportunity to do something else. I think this is at play when he talked about horizons of opportunity in the previous chapter, but such a recognition would help us when approaching the topic of destruction.

Surely there are those who simply enjoy watching the world burn (see my post on Thuggery, trolldom, and the Joker ethos). However, there are some cultural artifacts whose time have passed and they must die. Clay Shirkey, in Here Comes Everybody, talks about Abbot Johannes Trithemius, Abbot of Sponheim, who in 1492 published De Laude Scriptorum, a defense of the scribal tradition. He defended the tradition of having professional scribes take copy manuscripts painstakingly by hand, rather than using the faster and more economical moveable type printing press. His argument centers around what will be lost if the tradition vanishes: a profitable use of time that sharpens the mind and bends the spirit toward God. However the irony was, he published the tract using a printing house.

Here then is a case of destruction....not out of wanton need to destroy nor out of cultural failure. The Scribal tradition was a grand success, but it was eclipsed by superior technology and a new tradition. It was time for the tradition, as it stood, to die. Even so, it didn't die completely. It carries on in some few enthusiasts who are passionate about calligraphy and hand illuminated manuscripts.

All said, I think a more nuanced discussion of this issue of change and destruction might have been helpful.

Even so, Crouch is asking all the right questions and wrestling with the right issues. A fascinating read up to this point.

Soli Deo Gloria
Russell

Letter to the Editor re: Kathleen Parker on Rick Warren's Values Voter Forum

Every so often, I take up the mantle of submitting a letter to the Editor. My most recent attempt was in response to Kathleen Parker's editorial criticizing Rick Warren's Values Voter forum. Though the paper has not seen fit to publish my response, I thought I'd share it with you here. Be sure to read Parker's editorial. And then note this caveat that I generally enjoy Parker's writing and editorials....this is a rare case of disagreement. The text of my reply follows:

Kathleen Parker cries fowl over the Saddleback Church Candidates’ Forum. In her August 21 column she writes: “…while, yes, everybody has some kind of worldview, it shouldn’t be necessary in a pluralistic nation of secular laws to publicly define that view in Christian code.”

Just a little thought shows the intellectual poverty of her argument. The wall of separation of church and state is indeed a brilliant principle. It provides for a robust government and a robust religious climate by separating two institutions into different realms of responsibility. Institutions deal with management of resources, decision making, and setting the parameters of their constituent members. However, faith and politics are not institutions; they exist but in the realms of ideas and worldview. Faith and politics do not have constituent members, for they are inherently personal and held privately. The wall of separation does not apply to them.

A cursory glance at the great documents of American History shows that our leaders have always felt comfortable with such a distinction. FDR’s first inaugural address was replete with imagery ripped straight from the Bible and a request for prayers of the nation. Lincoln, in his second inaugural address dabbles deeply in the theology of providence and discerning the will of God. The very document that coins the phrase “wall of separation of church and state” ends with Jefferson asking for the prayers of the Danbury Baptists. Nowhere do the great minds appeal to the coercive power of churches to bind the consciences of their membership (an institutional no-no). Rather, they appeal to the personally held faith of the American citizens and leave it to the citizens how to respond. Historian Larry Witham’s recent book City Upon a Hill shows that the reverse is also true: American citizens have always felt the freedom to bring faith based concerns to the political sphere. Simply put, calls to remove faith talk from political discourse exhibit a reckless disregard for American history.

The genius of the American experiment, both in politics and in religion, lies in the right of private conscience. Because we have a wall of separation between the institutions of church and state, Rick Warren’s views, opinions, and questions carry as much coercive weight as do Oprah’s, or Kathleen Parker’s. One may find his views, opinions, and questions to be offensive or distasteful. However we must realize that Rick Warren has no institutional authority over the American public. The only authority he carries in America is the authority people have granted him through the persuasiveness of his faith grounded ideas. What could be more American than that?

Russell

Culture Making: Ch 2 -- cultural worlds

Continuing our reflections on Andy Crouch's Culture Making.... now up to chapter 2

I've been re-listening to the Ed Kilbourne tapes that I have from oh-so-long-ago. He has an outstanding rendition of the Pierce Pettis piece "Grandmother's Song" (enjoy this YouTube performance of Pettis singing it in 1984:



It's story of the grandmother who wrote poetry, but didn't share it with those around her. And it illustrates very well what Crouch is talking about in this chapter on cultural worlds.

Simply put, not all our cultural artifacts shape culture. “Culture requires a public: a group of people who have been sufficiently affected by a cultural good that their horizons of possibility and impossibility have in fact been altered, and their cultural creativity has been spurred, by that good’s existence.” (38) Indeed, I would suggest that the public is bound together in a special way by that shared cultural artifacts. Consider fan movements --- Trekkies as a glaringly extreme example. These are people who so identify with the cultural artifact of Star Trek that they write their own fiction, attend conventions, wear costumes, invent rules to the games that were portrayed on the show. And they're bound together.

Marketing and branding guru Kevin Roberts applies this very insight to his profession in his book Lovemarks when he writes: “Today the stakes have reached a new high. The social fabric is spread more thinly than ever. People are looking for new emotional connections. They are looking for what they can love. They are insisting on more choice, they have higher expectations, and they need emotional pull to help them make decisions. And finally, they want more ways to connect with everything in their lives -- including brands.” (36). If brands, as a cultural artifact, can bind people together with emotional attachments, so then can other cultural artifacts.

Crouch continues, asserting that: “Culture making requires shared goods. Culture making is people (plural) making something of the world – it is never a solitary affair. Only artifacts that leave the solitude of their inventors’ studios and imaginations can more the horizons of possibility and become the raw material for more culture making.” (40). He tells the story about Steve Jobs speaking with his engineers when they wanted to delay the release of the first Macintosh computer. "Real artists ship." was his reply. He dignfied their work as art, but he reminded them that art, to have impact, must have a public.

Put in different terms, my Rotary Colleague Mike Robinson frequently says "Information without action is overhead." In other words, if we don't do anything with the information that we receive, then it's a waste of time. Bayles and Orland have a wonderful little book called Art and Fear that addresses the problem of how the Artist overcomes fear and gets down to producing. One of the great fears is the fear of not really having any talent, to which Bayles and Orland reply “The world is filled with people who were given great natural gifts, sometimes conspicuously flashy gifts, yet never produce anything. And when that happens, the world soon ceases to care whether they are talented.” (27). The challenge of the culture maker is to produce and not sit on the blessings God has given.

Crouch then shows how this concern for a public immediately leads to an understanding that there are many publics. This blog has a public of a couple of dozen readers. Other blogs have vastly different publics. Different spheres produce different cultural artifacts. I'm fascinated how in the Presbyterian Church USA, we have our little publishing house with our little in house heroes...and just over the way, our Methodist brothers and sisters have their little publishing house with their little heroes....and so do the Episcopalians....and the Catholics....and the Orthodox. Cultural artifacts in each of those spheres rarely leak over into other spheres. And people wonder why we have Red and Blue America?

Crouch also deals with scale. He speaks of his favorite local coffee shop, in contrast to Starbucks. It may be small and localized and quirky, “But it is a real enterprise in making something of the world, with real cultural effects, and just because it is small does not mean it is insignificant or simple.” (45)

And this insight gives great hope to churches. Small churches need not envy the mega faith-plex that has the barrista, they indoor play place, and the super size communion meal. Bigger isn't necessarily better. If your church has a public, that is a good and it shapes and affects lives. There is dignity and worth in that shaping.

Crouch then tightens the lens to the family ... the crucible of culture making. We may not be able to do anything individually about the broader culture as a whole, but we can very powerfully impact the culture of our families and those closest to us. And that may very well have a cumulative effect far beyond what anyone expected.

Let me know your thoughts.

Soli Deo Gloria
Russell

Culture Making: Ch 1 - horizons of the possible.

In 1988, the summer between Junior and Senior years of my High School career, I attended the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts as an acting student. It was a five week intensive experience that brought together students from many different disciplines to learn and create together with expert instructors. Part of the experience was living together in the dorms at Furman University.... and one night, a bunch of the guys on my hall were gathered in Shev Rush's room, having conversations that were deeper than anyone would give us credit for, but not as deep as we thought we were.

And somewhere we talked about why we make art. I forget all the things that were bounced around, but in that session, I proposed that we make art so that we can be more like God. After all, God made us in His image. God reveals himself as a creator, so therefore it makes sense that creativity is a part of being made in his image.

I wouldn't remember this conversation were it not for what happened later. Just a few days later, a famous producer came to speak to the entire school. After giving a rousing speech, he asked the same question "Why do we make art?" .... and one of the other guys (I can't for the life of me remember his name) stands up and says "So we can be more like God." I was grateful that someone else picked up on my idea, but also a little disgruntled that he was stealing my thunder. Until famous producer, puzzled look on his face, said "Yeah...OK...why else?" and the point was forgotten.

But not by me. I've stewed on and cogitated on the idea that a significant part (not the totality, but a part) of what it means to be made in the image of God is to be made to be a creator.... not ex nihilo, as God did at the beginning of the space/time continuum, but a creator nonetheless.

And this is exactly where Andy Crouch begins his book Culture Making. And so today, I begin my chapter by chapter reflections on this most important book. Crouch looks at God as both creator and ruler: “Creators are those who make something new; rulers are those who maintain order and separation.” He sees that maintaining of boundaries and order are what enable future creation in others. The ruler's job is to set the bounds...and strangely, bounds help unleash creativity. “So in a way the Creator’s greatest gift to his creation is the gift of structure – not a structure which locks the world, let alone the Creator himself, into eternal mechanical repetition, but a structure which provides freedom. And those who are made in his image will also be both creators and rulers.” (22)

And we as creatures find ourselves born into the midst of this already extant creation, and we have to "make something of the world" (Crouch borrows the turn of phrase from Ken Meyers). This making something comes in the sense of using raw materials to actually make things (chairs, buildings, roads, farms, dixie cups) and also the sense of applying our minds to make sense of our situation.

In this broad sense, culture is whatever we do when we make something of the world. Every meal we cook, every crossword puzzle we work on, every present we wrap, every plant we cultivate, every report we generate....all of it is making something of the world, whether or not we acknowledge it (I suggest that one of the great gifts of this text is to make us consciously aware of all our activity .... liberating us from timekillers so that we can be both purposeful in activity and restorative in liesure).

However our culture making also is combined with our capacity for wonder. A chimpanzee can make a tool, a human has the capacity for wondering at the purposefulness of tools and considering how good design can make tools wonderful.

Crouch then takes us another step, relying on Peter Berger's work in Sacred Canopy, showing that we enter into culture that already exists. We also must make something of that culture....and that culture shapes our horizons. The culture that my children have been born into, that of an urban American Citizen, is vastly different from the culture of the children of a Kalihari bushman. And vastly different from the culture that my great great grandparents were born into. There is a sense in which culture is a feedback loop....things are transmitted to us and we must make sense of them.

He acknowledges that no-one individual makes culture. We make cultural artifacts (and I would add, we create cultural experiences ... like concerts or summer camps or worship services or football games). Some of those artifacts will become big enough to be incorporated into the framework of the culture, and these artifacts (and expereinces) will expand the horizons of the possible for people across a culture at large.

For instance: the interstate highway system. in the 19th century, long distance travel was accomplished mainly by river or rail. Any educated person knew the geography of the US rivers and cities (including Cincinnati) grew up as major centers of culture because these were the artieries of transportation. However, when Eisenhower had returned from Germany after World War II, he knew that the United States would benefit from a highway system like the autobahns of Germany (Eisenhower knew this firsthand: in the 1920's, he had led a convoy of trucks from east coast to west, just to see if there were enough roads that could connect the major cities....perhaps this cultural experience primed him for being impressed by the autobahns).

Now the interstates are the arteries. They have made possible many things: cheap transport of goods, easy access of travel to millions, Cracker Barrel and Waffle House. However interstates have made other things impossible. It would be very hard to travel from Boston to Philadelphia via horse anymore....the system of inns and boarding houses that accomodated horses are all gone. Horses aren't allowed on interstates. Cultural artifacts (and experiences) not only make new things possible, they make some old things impossible.

So Crouch proposes 5 questions to ask of any given artifact in doing analysis:
1) what does this artifact (experience) assume about the world (interstates assume automobiles for instance. Cookbooks assume easy access to materials)
2) what does this artifact assume about how the world should be (interstates assume that easy travel is better than difficult travel)
3) what does this artifact make possible?
4) what does this artifact make impossible?
5) what new forms of culture are created in response to this artifact (AAA becomes much more popular in response to interstate highway system. profusions of stores at interstate exits. Attractions in various locales. The Billboard industry, etc).

Notice that his questions avoid the immediate value judgement....is this good or bad. Crouch seems to lead us to ask a lot more questions before we get into the waters of making a value judgment.

So the challenges that come to my mind in this first chapter....the immediate questions that come to my mind.... what kind of cultural artifacts/experiences am I creating for my children/friends/readers/congregation members etc. I do things with my children that I think will be fun, but does it expand their horizons? How do I challenge our congregation members to make culture? How do I equip and empower them to?

Consider for instance the cultural artifact of the home .... a home is a constellation of a lot of cultural artifacts and experiences. In some ways, I think of it as a setting, a backdrop to culture making. However the setting sets the horizons for those who dwell in that setting.

The home in which I grew up was spacious. The most important setting for me was books. The house was saturated with books. The living room stretched along the back of the house...it was painted white with beige carpet. Windows facing the southeast lined one whole side of the room, flooding it with light. the other side was floor to ceiling bookshelves, including a complete set of the World Book encyclopedias. Books were important.

The kitchen was huge, as was the back yard. Cooking and nature were always around me. Mom and dad are extroverts who enjoy entertaining....so I saw a parade of interesting people come through our home...somtimes in big parties, sometimes in intimate dinners. Though at times a 7 year old child might have been bored by the grownup conversation, I learned that having people in the home is "normal" and ought to be relaxed and fun.

Just in these two paragraphs, I see how the horizons of my world have been set differently than those of people raised in a different setting. It's not necessarily better or worse (that will depend on what I do with those horizons). I was not raised around farm animals, nor was I raised learning to make handcrafted items with power tools .... my horizons are limited there. That's not good or bad, it just is.

The question is, how can I be intentional about the setting, the environment in which I raise my children? In which I work on a daily basis?

And there is the value of the book. I hope it raises for you more questions....questions about the hows and wherefores of your own life...questions about how to be faithful even in your choice of home design or cooking choices.

More to come.....

Soli Deo Gloria
Russell

Off the shelf: Culture Making

Thank you, Tullian Tchvidjian, for recommending Andy Crouch's Culture Making.

I can't remember who it was that said that reading William F. Buckley made them feel both smarter and dumber at the same time. That was my experience with this text. It is a humbling thing to read an author who articulates my best thoughts about christian practice and the call to make culture. The ideas ring like a solid and true tower bell within me, but Crouch phrases them far better that I have been able to at this point. Humbling.

And then, after 100 pages of being simultaneously excited over finding a kindred spirit and humbled over this man's craftsmanship, I found myself being whisked to new places where I hadn't even considered going. Crouch takes us on a gallop through redemptive history....pointing out God's redemptive purposes through culture. From Genesis to Revelation, friends. It was a glorious guided tour.

By the time I arrived in the third section of this book, in which Crouch suggests some disciplines for daily living, I found myself grabbing my notebook and scribbling down ideas. If Crouch's goal is to create cultural goods that expand the horizons of others, then he has succeeded wildly. Tullian was not indulging himself in hyperbole when he wrote: "Mark my words: this is one serious book, that if taken seriously, has the potential to make a serious impact. Seriously!"

I've finished it, and now I'm going to go back through a second time with you, dear readers. So rush out to the bookstore or library and pick up your copy. I'll be starting the Culture Making series, Lord willing, tomorrow.

Soli Deo Gloria
Russell

Saddleback church and the candidates forum

I missed a very important event on Friday night....the Saddleback Church candidates forum. Pastor Rick Warren hosted a forum in which he would ask identical questions of both John McCain and Barack Obama. The questions were designed to get at the heart of the concerns of evangelical Christians.

Most of us probably missed it....but you can read a transcript of the whole thing on the CNN website.

Warren has done a great service in putting this thing together. While many Eagle and Child readers are wary of the megachurch pragmatism that Warren exhibits when it comes to church growth, I suggest that his capacity to host events like this are a very positive contribution to Christianity and the cultural dialogue. Read Al Mohler's assessment....I'm usually in agreement with Mohler on these type things....and he has a very balanced read on his reservations about the event and his positive evaluation following the event.

Of course the whole thing is posted on YouTube as well....I strongly encourage you all to watch this as you're able. Here's an index:

Section 1: Warren's introduction and initial questions to Obama.

• Warren makes great points here about the relationship of faith and politics. "We believe in the separation of church and state, but we do not believe in the separation of faith and politics, because faith is just a world view, and everybody has some kind of world view. It's important to know what they are." Readers of the Eagle and Child will recognize that I make the same distinction btwn separation of church and state (institutions) and separation of faith and politics (spheres of human activity)
• Warren also hits on a theme dear to my heart.... restoration of civility: "....they both care deeply about America. They're both patriots. And they have very different views on how America can be strengthened. In America, we've got to learn to disagree without demonizing each other and we need to restore civility -- Yes. We need to restore civility in our civil discourse, and that's the goal of the Saddleback Civil Forum. " the words of the book of James keep coming back to my head...all that about taming the tongue and the tongue being a consuming fire.
• Warren has the guts to ask about the "greatest moral failure of your life" and the "greatest moral failure of America. Obama's answers -- for himself was drug use. For America, that we don't apply the command in Matthew to love your neighbor as yourself.
• Obama has good words about McCain for their work together on campaign finaince reform.

Section 2:

• What have you changed your mind upon over the past 10 years. (Warren acknowledges that a change of mind is not always bad). Obama: welfare reform... he has come to understand that work must be a centerpiece of social policy. He acknowledges that we're made for work.
• Most gut wrenching decision: Opposition to war in Iraq.

Section 3: Worldview questions

• What does it mean to trust in Christ? What does that look like? It pays to quote his entire answer here to put to rest some of the crazy speculation that Obama is a "dark horse muslim"

OBAMA: As a starting point, it means I believe in -- that Jesus Christ died for my sins, and that I am redeemed through him. That is a source of strength and sustenance on a daily basis. Yes, I know that I don't walk alone. And I know that if I can get myself out of the way, that I can maybe carry out in some small way what he intends. And it means that those sins that I have on a fairly regular basis, hopefully will be washed away. But what it also means, I think, is a sense of obligation to embrace not just words, but through deeds, the expectations, I think, that god has for us. And that means thinking about the least of these. It means acting -- well, acting justly, and loving mercy, and walking humbly with our god. And that -- I think trying to apply those lessons on a daily basis, knowing that you're going to fall a little bit short each day, and then being able to kind of take note and saying, well, that didn't quite work out the way I think it should have, but maybe I can get a little bit
better. It gives me the confidence to try things, including things like running for president, where you're going to screw up once in a while.

• Abortion: when does a baby get rights? Obama comes down on being pro-choice, while acknowledging the great moral struggles in this issue. His goal is to work within the Democratic party platform to reduce the number of abortions.
• Definition of Marraige: Obama says it is a sacred union of a man and woman. Against a constitutional ammendment: it is a matter of state law. Believes in the concept of Civil Unions (for issues like hospital visitation)
• Stem Cells: Obama: let's avoid moral quagmires if at all possible, but the use of embryos that are about to be discarded (a careful, limited use) is OK.

Section 4:

• Evil does exist and must be confronted. Acknowledgment we can't erase evil "that is God's task" we can confront it, however. We must have humility in confrontation....much evil is perpetrated in the name of good.
• Which supreme court justice would you not have nominated (great question Rick:) Obama: Clarence Thomas. Scalia (acknowledges his brilliance). Guarded on John Roberts: because he has been "too willing and eager" to give power to executive branch.
• Faith based organizations: believes in power of faith based organizations, but when using federal funds, they have to guard against discrimination in hiring.
• Education: Merit pay for teachers. Obama: set up a system of performance pay (in consultation with teacher union). We need to reward excellence.
• define rich: what is a number? (answer on next video, but it is below $150k as a definition of middle class.
  
  

Section 5:

• Rich defined continued: if you're making $250k then you're doing well .... you're in the top 3-4%. Call for fiscal responsibility (irresponsible to spend huge amounts without paying for it now). tax cut for $150k down. "modest increase" for $250k up.
• War. What's worth dying for? American freedom, national interests. need to co-operate internationally when genocide is involved
• Orphans: (warren's pet issue) -- great idea to have a national plan for orphans working with nongovernmental organizations. Obama has priase for Bush on AIDS plan
• Religious Persecution around the world. Obama: bear witness and speak out. Don't pretend it's not taking place. We also need to look to our own house...not engaging in torture and abiding by habeas corpus.

Section 6:

• International Slavery: Obama, this is a high priority and we need to work on this
• Why do you want to be president: Obama: grandmother made me imagine how the other guy feels.
• What would you say if you knew there wouldn't be repercussions: Obama "Well, you know what I would tell them? Is that solving big problems, like for example, energy, is not going to be easy and everybody is going to have to get involved. And we are going to have to all think about how are we using energy more efficiently and there's going to be a price to pay in transitioning to a more energy- efficient economy and dealing with issues like climate change. And if we pretend like everything is free, and there's no sacrifice involved, then we are betraying the tradition of America.I think about my grandparents' generation, coming out of a depression, fighting World War II, you know, they've confronted some challenges we can't even imagine. If they were willing to make sacrifices on our behalf, we should be able to make some sacrifices on behalf of the next generation."
  
  
  

Section 7: McCain is on the hot seat.

• Three wisest People you would rely on: Gen Petraeus, John Lewis, Meg Whitman (CEO of Ebay)Greatest personal moral faiulre and greatest moral failure of America: Personal is the failure of his first marraige. America's greatest moral failure is that we've not been devoted to causes greater than our self-interest. Post 9/11 we should have called upon people to serve a cause greater than yourself. When did you lead against your party's interests and own self interests: rattles off a list of places he bucked his party and "reached across the aisle" He dwells on opposing Reagan's desire to send troops to Beruit.
• What have you changed your mind on from 10 years ago: McCain -- offshore drilling, we need to do it now.
• Most gut wrenching decision: the decision not to be released from POW camp while friends stayed behind.
  
  

Somehow, a whole section is cut out from the online video ... and a very important section. Here are relevant answers from the transcripts:

• What does it mean to be a Christian? McCain: I'm saved and forgiven. McCain tells the story of the Prison Guard who etched a cross in the dirt on Christmas day.
• Abortion: McCain: life begins with conception. References his 25 year pro-life record.
• Marraige: McCain: Defined as between one man and one woman
• Stem cells: in favor of stem cell research....interested in new breakthroughs on skin cells.
• Does Evil exist: McCain: it does and we must defeat it. McCain defines the transcendent challenge of 21st c: Radical Islamic Extremism.
• Supreme Court Justices you would not have nominated: McCain: Ginsburg, Breyer, Souter, Stephens. Opposes them b/c they've been legislating from the bench.

Section 8

• Role of faith based organizations and federal funds: McCain -- faith based organizations should have no restrictions on hiring. McCain talks about Resurrection Baptist Church co-ordinating relief after Katrina....more than the government organizations.
• Education: McCain supports merit pay for teachers. Believes in choice and competition for schools. Charter schools, homeschooling, vouchers work. This is the "civil rights issue" of the 21st c.
• Define Rich: McCain...I want everybody to be rich. Don't believe in redistribution. Let's keep taxes low for everybody. i don't think you can talk simplistically about this.
• Line between security and privacy: Need to keep up with new technological advances for enemies to communicate...we have to step up to monitor those.

Section 9:

• What is worth dying for? McCain: freedom. We can't fight every wrong, but we can be a beacon of hope for the world. Troops would be committed only if American National Security interests are threatened. Our obligation is to stop genocide where we can. Speaks extensively about Georgia (the nation)
  
  

Section 10:

• Religous Persecution: Use of the bully pulpit, just like Reagan against the Soviet Union.
• Orphans: Would you commit to an emergency plan for orphans? McCain -- adoption has to become a lot easier here. Teddy Roosevelt was the first to talk about the importance of it. McCain talks about adopting a child from India (who is now 17)
• why do you want to be president: McCain ... to serve a cause greater than ourselves. To reach across aisles and talk with people.

Well, if you've made it to the bottom, I hope you've benefitted. This has been very helpful to me (though I'm still not telling you who I'm voting for).

Excelsior,
Russell