CD of the Week

Art is turning 40! Therefore, my CD this week will be a response to his. Art blogged that the CD of the week is basically anything by Buck Owens. I have to admit that my earliest memories of Buck were when he was past his prime and hosting Hee-Haw, which I am utterly convinced that we only watched because the other networks literally shut down on Saturday nights.

I fell in love with Buck's music later, when I heard his early stuff with Don Rich. I heard that Buck once said that his musical life died when Don died. Buck's music was an influence on country singers, country twangers, and rockers alike. If you don't like "Buckaroo," "Who's Gonna Mow Your Grass," "Tiger By The Tail," or "Streets of Bakersfield" then I just don't know what to think aboutcha.

So that leaves me to ask the question: "What if Buck loved the Beatles as much as the Beatles loved Buck?"

One possible answer lies on this album: Reverb Deluxe by the Derailers.

Man, this is a great album. It's really the only Derailers CD I own. I'm almost afraid to buy any others simply because this one is so perfect. The album is named after the famous Deluxe Reverb amplifier by Fender, and the cover is an extreme close-up of the bridge area of a vintage Fender Telecaster. Gee, guess what guitar sound is all over the album? Could it be....Telecasters thru Deluxe Reverbs? Why, even the guitar on the cover is finished in sparkle - just like the matching Teles often played by Buck and Don.

Don Rich's Fender Telecaster

This CD approaches every Fender fan's ideas of perfection - the guitars are pure California, encompassing both the Bakersfield twang of Buck and Don as well as Merle and Roy, and the surfy, summery sounds of the Beach Boys. Tony Villanueva (no longer with the group) and Brian Hofeldt honk along in perfect vocal harmony reminiscent of John and Paul (the Beatles, not the Apostles) as well as perfect guitar synergy.

The guitar instrumental "Ellen" is a true standout as are "Dull Edge of the Blade," "California Angel," and "Can't Stop a Train." Pop this CD in the car, open the windows and the sunroof, crank it up loud, and enjoy a beautiful spring day.

Re: The Good Stuff

John (an internet buddy and theological sparring partner whom I love dearly) at Locusts and Honey has posted a series of videos, referring to it as the music of his youth. Made me feel ancient. Here's some of the music of my youth:

The Police - Synchronicity II


Fleetwood Mac - Gypsy


Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms


Stevie Ray Vaughan - Couldn't Stand the Weather.
(Sorry, I didn't find the MTV video, here's a live performance)


Yep, a child of the '80s. Of course, these were my High School years. College vids would look pretty different.

CD of the Week

I am weary from the controversy.

I refuse to keep arguing with people who ascribe certain beliefs to me, challenge me to defend those beliefs (the ones I never said I have) so they can dismiss me.

I will not let my anger ruin my Christian witness. I will not let my arrogance ruin my Christian witness. I will love those who would dismiss me.

So, a few deep breaths later, I'm gonna take a cue from Art Ruch and describe my CD of the week.

Heartbreaker's Hall of Fame by Sunny Sweeney

One fine day I'm in my car listening to X-Country on my XM radio and I hear this song called "East Texas Pines" by someone named Sunny Sweeney. My hand reaches for the volume knob. "Man, this is GREAT!" Then I reach for that middle button on my Inno - the one that lets me record the song so I can listen to it again later. It has just the right amount of rock and roll attitude, country twang and down-home Texas honesty. I loved it.

Then I heard (and, yes, recorded) "If I Could." Faster, more rockin', more country. "If I could pay all these bills with this git-tar, then I would pay my bills with some rock and roll." Me too, Sunny, me too. The song was addictive. Listening to that song was like eating a Lay's potato chip - couldn't stop at just one. I listened to it over and over. I liked it even better than "East Texas Pines," which is to say that I was hooked. I also heard her cover of "16th Avenue," and so the album passed my test.

Willie's rule: Once you have heard three really good songs from an album or artist you did not know before, you then have permission to purchase said album. Three good songs (and no duds) means that the money you spend on the album will not be wasted. Hear only two? Wait until you hear the third.

Sunny passed the three song rule. So I checked out Sunny's website. Now it's confession time. For the last year or so, my favorite music has been produced by females. All the guys are way too Toby Keith or just plain whiny. I don't wanna listen to any "Who's Yer Daddy" posturing or any wrist-slashing, gosh-this-teen-angst-is-too-much-to-take-and-live Emo. An awful lot of very talented women have avoided those traps and made some really good music. Give me some Lucinda Williams over that stuff any day. The confession - Sunny Sweeney makes great music but she is one more musician I like who is so pretty that I feel like I need to apologize to my wife for buying her album.

Kate: "This is really good music. Who is it?"
Will: "Sunny Sweeney. She's new. I heard some of her stuff on XM and I had to get it."
Kate: "Can I see the CD cover?"
Will: "Here."
Kate: "She's really pretty."
Will: "Really? I hadn't looked at the front cover. You're prettier."

Her website shows her wearing a Merle Haggard T-shirt. Haggard, who is in a two way tie with Cash for the greatest male country artist ever in my book, gives her real country credibility. Right now everybody is wearing Cash shirts. The Hag shirt, well that's cool. She is also pictured with Dwight Yoakam and Shooter Jennings - cleverly placing herself among country artists rather than country stars. We know what audience she's shooting for. She also duets with Jim Lauderdale for instant genuine alt-country hipster cred.

There's not a bad song on the CD. No big power-ballad weddin' song, no cliche-riddled "trying to hard to be country," no Brooks & Dunn style '80s Pop-Rock with a steel guitar to make it country. Just great songs, infectious melodies punctuated with twangy Telecasters and crying pedal steels. She even does justice to Iris DeMent's wonderful "Mama's Opry."

Like Lucinda Williams, Sweeney understands country as white blues, an exercise in soulful honesty and truth-telling. Like Dwight Yoakam or Steve Earle, she sees nothing wrong with adding some aggressive elements of rock to her twang. Her vocal sound falls naturally somewhere between the Texas drawl of Natalie Maines and the raspy little-girl voice of Australian country sensation Kasey Chambers. It's hard-core honky-tonk from an artist who identifies more with Loretta Lynn than Faith Hill. And success is well-deserved: "Heartbreaker's Hall of Fame" was originally an indie release and is now being distributed by a major label. I look forward to hearing what she does next!

If you like the video below, I recommend heading over to iTunes (like I did) or the local CD shop (wish there was one near me) and picking this one up!

Biblical Authority, Cultural Trends, and the Nature of Power

We live in an increasingly power-affirming culture. The War on Terror / War in Iraq is based on the neoconservative doctrine that freedom and democracy can be spread by military force. Life is viewed as a competition. The world is made up of winners and losers. Engage in an online debate and you may get "pwned!"

Our culture, in my humble view, is increasingly and disturbingly boo-yah, who's your daddy, we'll put a boot in your ass - it's the American way! It's a sad state of affairs when the voice of a generation is Toby Keith, but no one reflects this way of thinking and the cultural trend than he does.

So it's no surprise to me that the whole controversy over the Jesus Tomb is framed by self-identified conservatives as a debate over biblical authority. And in straw-man fashion, many conservatives claim a monopoly on biblical authority - those who understand it differently deny the authority of the Bible.

Now before you go any further, I suggest looking up some stuff on George Lakoff and the strict father frame vs. nurturant mother frame. He explains what I'm talking about better than I can, even though I disagree with the use of mother-father images (gender stereotypes do no favors to the nature of the debate). Agree or disagree with his conclusions, but Lakoff is a keen observer of cognitive science and linguistics and many of his premises are correct.

I don't think it's terribly unfair to state that I think conservatives hold to an authoritarian view of biblical authority. The Bible said it, so BOO-YA, that's how it is. It's not a criticism. In some ways I am conservative, and I have been known to play the "because I'm the daddy and I said so" card with my children. Not often, but it has happened.

Liberals (and in many ways I am liberal too) hold to a less authoritarian view of biblical authority, and hold the Bible up as a primarily theological document while questioning its reliability as a document of history, biology, genealogy, etc. The liberal worldview subjects all forms of authority to questioning and scrutiny (not rejection, as some would mischaracterize it).

I fear I'm not expressing myself well here. This is turning into one of those seminary papers in which I question "the nature of _____" without answering the question that started the paper in the first place. Let me try to reign myself in a little bit.

I have serious problems with an authoritarian worldview even when that means having questions about biblical authority. I believe that power and authority should be held like an egg - gently, carefully, respectfully. Wielding authority and power like a status symbol or like a weapon is sin.

I think it is wrongheaded to believe that the Bible speaks with one voice on the nature of resurrection. The assertion that "in the first century a resurrection with a spiritual body would make no sense," is questionable - there are multiple biblical accounts of Theophanies without flesh and bone bodies. Actually, spiritual bodies are all over the Old Testament. Take the fourth person in the fiery furnace, for instance, or the bones that danced for Ezekiel.

1. I do not believe that these ossuaries belonged to Jesus and his family. Jesus was a poor boy, and inscribed ossuaries are for a rich man's burial. Simple as that.
   
2. I believe in the resurrection. I believe that after his death and burial, Jesus remained a living reality in the lives of his followers. I do not purport to explain the nature of this reality, as (a) there is a God and it ain't me, and (b) the Bible does not speak with a clear, unified voice on how resurrection works.
   
3. Even if these were Jesus' bones (and I don't believe they are, but even if they were!) they prove nothing regarding resurrection either way. How do we know his bones weren't left behind at ascension and then buried? How do we know that Jesus' resurrected body used the old flesh and bones at all?
   
4. We should not let anything as specious as a poorly made archaeological claim, a sensationalist TV documentary, and petty speculative theological arguments cause a divide in the body of Christ.

Question of the day: How did Jesus of Nazareth wield authority - like a gun, like bling, or like an egg?

Christian Frustration

The whole "Family Tomb of Jesus" thing has stirred up the hornet's nest in the Methodist blogosphere. It appears that the debate has taken a very predictable turn, hinging upon the assertion/assumption that if these are the bones of Jesus, then there was no resurrection.

And it has led us to, quite naturally, some degree of debate over the nature of resurrection. What exactly is a resurrection?

Having graduated from seminary, my first instinct is to ask my New Testament professor, Steve Patterson (no stranger to controversy), what he thinks.

In his article on the subject, he writes:

For many Christians, the literal physical resurrection of Jesus is the miracle that proves Jesus was the Son of God, and that we should therefore believe in Jesus. If this miracle were shown to be untrue—by the discovery of Jesus’ body, in this case—then Christian faith would itself be shown to be untrue. But for many other Christians, the resurrection of Jesus is not to be understood in this way. The earliest resurrection confession, reflected in Paul’s letter, First Corinthians, did not present Jesus’ resurrection as physical in this way. Paul argues that resurrection is only possible insofar as God gives to the dead a new body, which he calls a “spiritual body” (1 Cor 15:44). “Flesh and blood,” he says, “cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable” (1 Cor 15:50). Of course, Paul’s view is not the only one in the New Testament. The writers of Matthew and Luke, and possibly John, all believed Jesus’ physical body was raised from the dead. This is why many insist on it today as fundamental to Christian faith. But to insist on it, as so many do, is to ignore the diversity of the New Testament itself, which ought to authorize similar diversity among Christians today.

Hat tip: my friend, former classmate and controversial figure (and he likes it that way) Chuck Currie

To paraphrase, if we truly believe Paul's confession in I Corinthians 15 (the earliest written explanation of resurrection, BTW) then even if these are the bones of Jesus that proves nothing about the resurrection itself. Of course it does challenge the witness of the Gospel authors or, more fundamentally, our understanding of the Gospel confessions.

Also, on the Damascus Road Paul did not experience Jesus as a flesh-and-bone human but rather as something resembling a theophany. Other theologians even argue that the body of Christ that is truly risen is the Church - again language and imagery courtesy of good ole Paul. Yet others will point out that the body of Christ present in the Gospel resurrection stories is fundamentally different or changed in some mysterious way - it can walk through locked doors and is unrecognizable to Jesus' own closest friends until he chooses to reveal his identity.

My most significant problem with the whole debate is this: we base our theological claims on one fundamental assumption - that the resurrection is the beginning and end of the Christian faith. I agree that an understanding of resurrection is foundational to the faith, but doesn't that go beyond what God does with a dead body? And doesn't our faith also have something to do with how Jesus lived his life, what he taught and how he treated people? Isn't it foolish to assume that all theology hinges upon how he was born, how he died and how the resurrection took place?

If all we are interested in is proving the assertions of the Apostles' Creed to be historically factual, then the atheists are right about us - we're nuts. Let's focus instead upon being an incarnation of the risen body of Christ - the Church (capital C), loving God and neighbor, embodying mercy and grace, living out Matthew 25 (feeding the hungry and all that jazz) and walking humbly (not arrogantly or angrily) with God.

Instead of focusing on what it meant to say that Christ rose from the grave 2,000 years ago, let's focus on living like Christ is risen here and now.

Go Dawgs!

I never pay attention to March Madness, but when my alma mater is doing this well and the coach is my brother-in-law's former roommate, I have to say it.

GO SALUKIS!

My bachelor's degree and my first master's are from SIU and I'm really excited for my old school.

God is unfair, thanks be to God.

Okay, I have to admit that since I came across links and references to this article via the MethoBlog I have been utterly fascinated with it.

I've never made any bones about the fact that I am prone to depression. I've mentioned it from the pulpit, I discussed it in seminary, and I own the way it influences my own theological thinking and formulations. In short, I tend to actively look for hope rather than despair largely because I need to do that; to do otherwise feeds my depression and renders me ineffective as a spiritual leader.

So when I read that Americans Get an 'F' in Religion, I look for hope. Some church leaders, if not the vast majority, will view this as a problem. I choose to view it as an opportunity. We have an opportunity to teach an new generation about God without years of biblical baggage, without questionable exegetical practices, and with a clean slate. It's a more challenging job to be sure, but at least we know what we have to work with.

But here's the part of that article that bugs me. I know diddley-squat about the Bible Literacy Project and the Bible and its Influence curriculum, but I find John Hagee's critique of it fundamentally flawed. From the article:

The Bible and Its Influence has been blasted by conservative Christians such as the Rev. John Hagee, pastor of the 18,000-member Cornerstone Church in San Antonio. Hagee calls it "a masterful work of deception, distortion and outright falsehoods" planting "concepts in the minds of children which are contrary to biblical teaching."

Hagee wrote to the Alabama legislature opposing adoption of the text, citing points such as discussion questions that could lead children away from a belief in God. Example: Asking students to ponder if Adam and Eve got "a fair deal as described in Genesis" would plant the seed that "since God is the author of the deal, God is unfair."

The fundamental problem is this: GOD IS UNFAIR. Teaching anything else is clearly unbiblical.

Don't get me wrong - God is JUST, but God's justice has nothing to do with our concept of fairness.

Read Genesis 4. Cain murders his brother Abel in cold blood. God knows it, hunts Cain down, and questions him. God hands down a rather lenient punishment (no "eye for an eye" here).

13 Cain said to the Lord, "My punishment is greater than I can bear! 14 Today you have driven me away from the soil, and I shall be hidden from your face; I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and anyone who meets me may kill me." 15 Then the Lord said to him, "Not so! Whoever kills Cain will suffer a sevenfold vengeance." And the Lord put a mark on Cain, so that no one who came upon him would kill him.

Let me get this straight - Cain kills Abel, and God gives Cain protection for life? And God is supposed to be FAIR?

What about the parable of the laborers in the vineyard from Matthew 20? The Kingdom of God is like this: A vineyard owner goes out in the morning and hires some day laborers. He hires some more at noon, and some more close to the end of the day. At the end of the day, he pays them all the same amount - their day's wage.

NOT FAIR! And when the laborers complain, the owner says, "Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or are you envious because I am generous?'"

If God were fair, we'd be screwed. If God were fair, Grace would be out of the question. God's nature is this - we miss out on a punishment that we deserve, and we receive a gift that we do not deserve. Grace and mercy have absolutely nothing to do with fairness.

Hagee is wrong.
God is not fair. God is gracious.
God is not fair. God is merciful.
God is not fair. God is just.

God is not fair. Thanks be to God.

Absurdity or Postmodern Awesomeness?

I have one of these! It's the Greek New Testament, the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th Edition (NA27).

It is a Greek New Testament with a Latin title and German footnotes. And I speak English.

YEEHAW! I can't decide if that's absurd or awesome. Maybe it's awesome because it's so absurd, or so absurd that it's awesome.

What should the congregation call me

The title of this blog comes from a dude in my previous congregation who always called me Preach. Every Sunday morning I would shake his hand and he would ask, "How's it going, Preach?" He was a funny fellow with a great sense of humor, always far too spry for his advancing age. He's one of those guys who is younger than his age would indicate, if you know what I mean.

All of which leads me to the big question, how do you refer to your pastor? Or if you are a pastor, how do you prefer the congregation refer to you?

Personally, I always thought of myself as just Willie or Will. I have no problem with the congregation calling me Will. In fact, I kind of prefer being called by my name and not by a title.

But I know some folks want to be reverent and respectful.

Here are some of the common options:

• Pastor Will. In my understanding, the "Pastor firstname" formulation is relatively new. If you're gonna call me that, PLEASE use Pastor Will and NOT Pastor Willie. Pastor Willie sounds really juvenile, or like you think Willie Nelson is your preacher.
• Rev. Deuel. Really formal. Tough to hold a normal conversation with someone who calls me that.
• Rev. Will. I kind of like that.
• Preach. Irreverent, disrespectful, and wholly fitting with my personality. I love it.
• Late for Dinner. Never call me that.

Am I missing any?

Christina Aguilera and Bruce Springsteen – Postmodern Pioneers

Earlier in this blog I posted a review of Bruce Springsteen's album We Shall Overcome: The Seeger Sessions (American Land Edition). I love this album.

Lately I've heard a couple of tunes from Christina Aguilera's new album Back to Basics. I don't have the album so I can't give it a proper review. I can only comment on the tunes I've heard.

For a few years now I've been a big fan of Leonard Sweet's book SoulTsunami. Sweet's writing is not for everyone, and some find his wild, rambling style frustrating and difficult to read. Having Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder, I love it. In the book he comments that the postmodern 21^st Century church has to move forward and backward at the same time. I dig the embrace of paradox. I think he's onto something. We can move forward into the future by digging deeply into our past, to forgotten traditions and ancient practices. This certainly speaks to my own experience, as a practice of Centering Prayer and Lectio Divina helped me to move forward and make a genuine leap of faith.

So what does this have to do with music? Everything. Christina has a huge hit right now with the song Candyman, which takes the basic sound of the Andrews Sisters (musically it really is almost Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy from Company B) with updated percussion and playfully sexy lyrics. On a side note, her sexual playfulness is directed at a single partner – her husband – and reflects a healthy kind of sexuality, the kind the church ought to embrace. (What if the church spent as much energy embracing healthy sexuality as it does condemning? But I digress....) As a result, her music sounds fresh, new and exciting.

And let me say that I'm the LAST person I ever thought would be a fan of Christina Aguilera or any of the “teen pop” sensations of the last decade. I've always believed she has an incredible voice while lacking artistic vision. But it appears to me that she is emerging as a real artist, and I respect what she's doing. I actually really like some of what I've heard from the new discs.

Springsteen does the same thing on Seeger, especially on the version of How Can A Poor Man Stand Such Times And Live? He takes an ancient folk song and places it in a new context, rewriting some of the lyrics to express the plight of those left behind by the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

Both artists have recontextualized old sounds and old songs, making them speak to people here and now. Neither work sounds like an artifact on display in a museum. Old sounds are brought to life (is it okay if I say resurrected?) for new ears and new minds. It is an amazing feat. It is the height of what's great about our postmodern context, and there is a lot we can learn from it.

As a musician, I often wonder what postmodern blues might be like; and I don't mean Albert King with a drum machine or an emo Robert Johnson. When I think postmodern blues, I think of Daniel Lanois' music from the soundtrack of Sling Blade, which sounds both ancient and modern; a sonic portrait of the old South that is impossibly new and fresh.

This is the same challenge I face as a pastor; ancient religion, ancient practices and rituals integrated with new people, new contexts in a new millennium. Dig the paradox. Embrace the past, pay homage to the ancient traditions, bringing it to life in the new world.

Not easy. Real art never is.

Thanks Be to God

I went to St. Louis yesterday with my mother-in-law, my father-in-law, and my wife. My mother-in-law has now completed two chemotherapy appointments and she was getting a PET scan to see whether the treatment is working. She was diagnosed with Lymphoma and had an orange-sized tumor in her abdomen around her aorta and vena cava.

Good news! The tumor itself has shrunk by 50% and its activity level has gone from 13.8 to 2.5 (I don't know much about the interpretation of those numbers, but my wife does and she is VERY pleased).

My father-in-law has been convinced that she will be fine. "She has real strong faith and she's meaner'n hell," he says. Her faith is an example for me. She has accepted and expressed that "either way, I will be healed. Even if that means going to be with God."

Well, we all agree. But we like this kind of healing better. Those test results were very good news. The doctor was upbeat, so were we, and we pray for continued healing.

Thanks be to God!

The Revolution Starts Now

Okay, I nicked the title of this post from the 2004 Steve Earle album, and I am an Earle fan. But this post has nothing to do with that album.

Several years ago, a coworker of mine had a sign in her office. It was one of those pieces of photocopied text that you see pinned up in offices and cubicles everywhere. It said, "The truth shall set you free. But first, it shall PIxx YOU OFF." (Well, it had the whole word, not pixx, but you get the point).

This morning I stumbled across an article called "Preaching Revolution" by Zack Exley. Exley offers up a portrait of a progressive evangelical movement in America that is gurgling beneath the surface of the religious landscape.

I love grassroots movements. I love a good Cinderella story (or for those who are not biblically illiterate, a good David and Goliath story). I love rooting for the underdog (unless the underdog happens to be the Chicago Cubs - hey, you gotta draw the line somewhere!). And I consider myself a progressive evangelical Christian. I think these folks are onto something.

From the article: ... the Revolution is not primarily a reaction to Republican attempts to politicize the church. What sets it apart from mainstream evangelicalism is not a liberal rejection of Republican politics, but rather a more radical rejection of conservatism and liberalism, and anything else that is not the “kingdom of God.”

HALLELUJAH AND AMEN!

Bishop Willimon recently blogged about how mainline Christianity has lost its nerve. He's right. We've been so afraid of ticking people off that we've tempered our truth-telling, lost our prophetic voice, and become irrelevant. What's worse, we've descended into theological nitpicking, arguing about biblical literalism and authority (while ignoring the needs of our laypersons who are growing ever more biblically illiterate) and lost our credibility in the eyes of many.

Why are Christians interested in debating evolution vs. creation? Shouldn't the church be focused on what the creation narrative means - that God has appointed us stewards of God's creation? Why have Christians allowed ourselves to be pawns in partisan political games rather than exposing partisan politics for what it really is: partisan politics tears people down, Christianity is supposed to build people up; partisan politics exploits the moral and ethical values of the masses in order to serve its own economic agenda, Christianity should be about saving people from economic, physical and spiritual distress (all are interrelated).

Christianity is supposed to be a revolution. We treat Christianity like it's nothing more than a good idea. They don't hang people on crosses for having good ideas - they hang them for being revolutionaries. Jesus and Paul were always in the business of telling people what they weren't ready to hear: specifically that God loves your enemies as much as God loves you; because God loves you, you are supposed to change your ways and treat people differently; that your faith (that is, your service to God and each other) is more important than your religion (saying the right creeds and confessions).

Regain your theological spine. Reclaim the prophetic voice. Tell the churches the uncomfortable, disconcerting truths. It will tick them off. Then it will set them free.

The Revolution Starts ........ NOW!

Real Live Preacher goes to SXSW

Real Live Preacher blogs about getting to go to SXSW. Color me jealous! Of course, I would love to go to a music festival, especially this one or the Austin City Limits festival.

Lots of acts I love will be there, including Kelly Willis, Ray Wylie Hubbard, Bill Kirchen, Doyle Bramhall, Charlie Sexton, Augie Meyers, Hayseed Dixie, Guy Forsyth, Sunny Sweeney, and Kenny Wayne Shepherd will be performing with Pinetop Perkins (former Muddy Waters sideman) and Hubert Sumlin (Howlin' Wolf's lead guitarist!) Yikes! Plus there's a whole tech convention and film festival.

That would be one fun week for Pastor Will!


Real Live Preacher

Praise, Protest, and Preaching

As you can tell if you've been following this blog, I am a huge music fan. I'm totally into rock, blues, folk, soul, and even some country music. I'm particularly fond of a lot of music from the 60s, especially the Beatles and Dylan. It's almost a cliché to say that you love Dylan and the Beatles, but there really is something about their music that resonates with me deeply and I can't help but keep going back to it.

Now, as a Christian and a pastor I have always had this weird, guilty feeling that I should like Contemporary Christian music. The folks who write and perform that music are rockers (like me), they are Christians (like me), and they have a deep commitment to the church and to evangelism (like me). Problem is, I don't like a lot of it. I've never been able to put my finger on exactly why I don't like it.

Well, leave it to the Sage, the Prophet, the real Songwriter to help me put into words what I feel. I've been reading Dylan's Chronicles, Volume 1, Bob's first installment of his autobiography. On page 54 he writes a bit about protest songs. Dylan has always asserted that he didn't really write protest songs, they were just songs that expressed how he felt even though many folks interpreted them as protests. I agree with that assessment. Here's what Dylan writes:

Protest songs are difficult to write without making them come across as preachy and one-dimensional. You have to show people a side of themselves that they didn't know is there.

There it is. That makes perfect sense to me. As usual, Bobby is onto something.

Substitute the word "Christian" for "protest" and that's pretty much how I feel about most Christian music these days. An awful lot of Contemporary Christian music, including Praise and Worship music, comes across as one-dimensional and sometimes preachy. Many times the songs come across as expressing a sort of hollow piety, with no real critical insight or genuine self-expression, at least in my opinion.

Of course, the irony is that during the "born again Bob" period, some of his own gospel music lacked the biting insight and the poetic flow that makes so much of his music timeless and appealing. "Gotta Serve Somebody" has that insight; it reflects the universal condition that our actions are in the service of good or evil whether we're aware of it or not. "Every Grain of Sand" walks the fine line between faith and doubt, and expresses the Christian's reluctance to gaze inward at our own nature; it reflects the fear that we might judge ourselves as harshly or even more harshly than God does. "Saved," on the other hand, with its repetition of the phrase "saved by the blood of the lamb," sticks pretty close to pious church language without expressing any sort of critical introspection or deeper analysis of the human-divine relationship.
So often when I'm listening to CCM or Praise and Worship music, I feel like repeating the words of Elvis when he interrupts Milkcow Blues Boogie: "Hold it fellas. That don't move me. Let's get real, real gone for a change."

Don't just repeat the Psalmist or Paul. (Have you ever noticed how utterly dependent Christian songwriters are on Paul and the Psalms? They don't do much with Jesus except repeat his name, praise his name, or lift up his name.) Dig deep into your soul. Give me something to really think about, something to pray about, something that makes me look inward and outward and upward. Give me something that makes me think, something that makes me feel. Show me something about myself that I didn't already know, or something that I'm in denial about, reveal something about the human condition and God's hopes and dreams for it.

Having ranted against others, now let me turn my pointed finger back at myself. Do I challenge myself to fully express my relationship with God in my preaching? Do my sermons carry the quality I look for in a great song? Do I stand before the congregation every Sunday and show the folks who are truly listening something about themselves that they didn't know? Am I willing to bare my soul in front of the Church? Or am I content to just tell the story, leaving the work of introspection to the congregants?

Recently I read the book The Jazz of Preaching by Kirk Byron Jones. I highly recommend it for anyone who preaches and appreciates music as deeply as I do. You don't have to be a jazz fan (I'm not) in order to get something from it. This book has caused me to think deeply about the parallels between the art of musical expression and the art of preaching. It caused me to throw away the manuscript, to let the music breathe when I'm preaching, to improvise within a narrative structure, to let the song (sermon) be in a relationship with the listener (congregation) in the moment - in real time.

Another great songwriter, John Prine once said something to the effect that great songwriting begins with a blank page and leaving out what doesn't belong on it. My challenge is to compose a sermon like Dylan or Lennon, expressing what we don't know about ourselves or are afraid to say out loud, and to preach it like B.B. King plays a guitar solo, hitting the right notes at the right time and leaving out superfluous notes and passages. To know what to say and what not to say, to know what to play and what not to play. I pray that my preaching is devoid of uncritical piety, of utter dependence on words that someone else said first and better, of unreflective fluff. Let my preaching be soulful, jazzy, bluesy, expressive and relational.

Jesus, is that you?

Okay. This guy, Jose de Jesus, claims to be the second coming of Jesus - literally - and the antichrist (he claims that is not contradictory, the "antichrist" is the next incarnation of Jesus on earth). Big story on Primetime Live, but I didn't watch it.

Same week I hear about this, I hear James Cameron claims to have found the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth - where he is buried alongside his wife, mother and son. Big show on the Discovery Channel, again, I didn't watch it.

Question of the day: Has anyone thought to ask Jose de Jesus if the Cameron tomb is where he was buried the first time?

Independence Day in Ghana

March 5 marks the 50th Anniversary of Ghana's independence from Britain.



Let's celebrate with some goat on a stick!

powered by performancing firefox

Commissioned!

Congratulate me, peoples!



I checked the mailbox this morning to find out that I will be commissioned at Annual Conference this year!



I haven't been around much the last few months. Been kind of busy figuring out how to be a full-time pastor. I've done some funerals, a wedding, and some pastoral care. I have an office with a mess of messes dating back at least ten years, maybe more. My mother-in-law was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (NHL) and has begun chemotherapy. My brother-in-law is getting divorced. My wife has been extremely busy with her family's needs, and my son has played baseball, basketball and now track, and my daughter is a cheerleader. I meet myself coming and going.



Yep, life's been busy. And in the meantime I've done the paperwork for commissioning, so this June I will become "Rev. Will, probationary elder."



Pray for my family and pray for me.

powered by performancing firefox