A Love Song For Rose Tyler

(Image found at Fan Pop.)

WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS!!!

There's a girl who I can't get out of my mind today. She's a girl I've grown attached to in the past couple of months, but last night I had to say goodbye, never knowing if I'll ever see her again.

Her name is Rose Tyler.

When I first met her, she was an ordinary nineteen-year-old South London girl living with her widowed mom Jackie, working at a department store, and spending her lunch breaks with her boyfriend Mickey. Every day was the same for her. Nothing new or exciting ever happened.

Until the day she met the Doctor, the 900-year-old Time Lord who travels across space and time in his bigger-on-the-inside police box, the TARDIS. That's when everything changed.

For the past couple of months I've been catching up with Rose's adventures with the Doctor. Prior to that, the only thing I knew about Doctor Who was that it was an old '70s sci-fi show staring some curly haired guy who loved long scarves. But ever since I heard Christopher Eccleston utter those famous words--"I'm the Doctor"--I had no choice but to hop aboard the TARDIS with Rose and the Doctor.

As Chesteron once said, "Fairy tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten." And that's why I'm such a rabid Doctor Who fan. It's not about the Doctor's cute British accent, or his good looks, or even the special effects. It's about what the Doctor represents: adventure, traveling, using your logic, fighting the monsters, and finding your inner strength. This is what the Doctor teaches me, and it's what the Doctor taught Rose for two seasons.

Until the great Cybermen-Dalek war.

At the end of it all, Rose may have been safe with Jackie, Mickey, and Pete the father she never knew, in an alternate universe. But there was one thing she could never have: the Doctor.

Why should I be so upset over a fictional character? I think it's because, in a way, I'm Rose Tyler. I want to meet someone who can suddenly pop up in my life and help me see there's more than just what I see. I want someone I can love just as much as Rose loves the Doctor. And I think I might have found that person, but it's still way too early in our relationship to know for sure. But he is pretty special.

Either way, here's a little song for all the Rose Tylers out there.

This Week In Cool Stuff: 07/29/12

Normally I do my weekly This Week In Cool Stuff post on Saturdays, but I was spending so much time working on my Chick-Fil-A post that I honestly could not get to TWICS until today.

So here are some of this week's coolest stuff:

-The Oatmeal hits the nail on the head with "How To Suck At Your Religion."

-If you ever wondered what the whole bit about dashing babies against rocks in Psalm 137 is all about, Peter Rollins explains. Excerpt:

The point here is that, when it comes to prayer, we must be free to express the full range of the moans that lie within us. While we might be inclined to think that these moans express directly what we think, more often than not they simply express a cluster of frustrations and fears that will do more damage if not given space; frustrations and fears that can be worked through only as they are expressed.

-Earlier this week I emailed Bo Sanders of Homebrewed Christianity to explain the whole "God changes" thing in process theology. This past Wednesday, Bo wrote his reply.

-And finally, Jason M. Dye posts an article written by his friend Cameron comparing the Church's persecution of LGBT people to the Church's persecution of Galileo. Money quote:

Today, science is turning up more and more and more evidence faster and faster that substantiates the infinite and beautiful variations of human sex, orientation, and gender created so complexly by our Incredible creator.

The Bible is misquoted, mistranslated and out-right ignored and used, as it was used on Copernicus and Galileo, to support HUMAN prejudices and idolatry, all the while ignoring not only his infinite complex creation, but the true heart of marriage - to love, honor, cherish, and love as Christ loved us. Our marriages fail, because we do not nurture, cherish, honor and love one another as Christ loved us and died for us, as He loves and nurtures us still.

Of Boycotts, Burning Bridges, and Chicken

*UPDATE 8:58 PM: Just want to let everyone know that I wrote this before I found out about Jonathan Merritt's recent disclosure. It's not right for me to comment on someone else's personal life, so I will not discuss that. I will say, however, that Merritt's got my support.


I hate to sound like a hipster, but I knew Chick-Fil-A donated money to anti-gay rights organizations before everyone else did. But now that the cat is out of the proverbial bag, a boycott against the company is spreading all over the nation. Even the Jim Henson company has severed ties with Chick-Fil-A. Who knew the Muppets were such big allies?

Not everyone is hopping on the boycott bandwagon, though. A few days ago, Jonathan Merritt wrote an article for the Atlantic explaining that he will still eat at Chick-Fil-A, not because of the company president's views on gay marriage, but because he feels that our "boycott culture" is already dividing our nation enough already:

Gay and lesbian groups were famously rankled when pro-family activists reacted against Kraft for posting a photo of an Oreo cookie with rainbow-hued filling last month in honor of Gay Pride Month, and also when similar groups protested JCPenney for announcing lesbian talk show host Ellen DeGeneres would be its next spokesperson.

So should the 45 percent of Americans who oppose gay marriage opt for Chips Ahoy! instead of Oreos? Should they begin shopping at Belk instead of JC Penny? If they did, it wouldn't make any more sense than the endless failed calls for liberal consumers to boycott Urban Outfitters, because its owner is a conservative and Rick Santorum donor, or to not order from Domino's Pizza, because it was founded by a Catholic conservative who helped fund anti-abortion causes.

As a bisexual man, I personally choose not to eat at Chick-Fil-A because I don't want to support an organization that says I shouldn't have equal rights. However, Merritt does bring up a good point.

Many of you no doubt remember the kerfuffle last year after Sojourners Magazine turned down an advertisement from Believe Out Loud. I, along with many others, was royally pissed at Sojourners for deliberately avoiding the issue of LGBT inclusion in the Church. However, for many of my friends, it wasn't enough to simply boycott Sojourners Magazine . . . you had to boycott everyone associated with Sojourners as well. To me, that was taking things a little too far. Jim Wallis may have needed to stop tip-toeing around LGBT-related issues, but refusing to break bread with him kinda goes against the whole inclusion thing, doesn't it?

A more recent example is the hooplah surrounding Timothy Kurek's upcoming book Jesus in Drag. Readers will no doubt remember that I criticized the book's concept, but it did open up a dialogue between Tim and me. Some of my other LGBT friends, thought, were less assertive and more aggressive towards Tim. While I definitely understand my friends' anger, I worried that by portraying Tim as an enemy, they were doing the same thing fundamentalists have been doing to us for years.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it's silly to boycott Chick-Fil-A. I'm just saying that it's way too easy to get trapped in the cycle of burning bridges. But the more bridges we burn, the harder it is for human beings to connect.

Thoughts On Process Thought (Video Post)

Thoughts On Process Thought from Travis Mamone on Vimeo.


For those of you who wonder what this whole "process theology" stuff I keep talking about, hopefully this video will help.

Or if nothing else, you get to see my sexy face for twelve minutes.

Further reading:

-Process and Reality by Alfred North Whitehead
-Process Theology: A Guide for the Perplexed by Bruce Epperly
-The Process Perspective I and II by John B. Cobb Jr.
-Process-Relational Philosophy: An Introduction to Alfred North Whitehead by C. Robert Mesle

This Week In Cool Stuff: 07/21/12

-Peter Enns debunks John Piper's interpretation of the Canaanite genocide in Deuteronomy, and gives a more reasonable explanation instead.

-Emily Timbol-Reeves points out evangelicalism's overemphasis on virginity. Money quote:

While there isn't anything wrong with encouraging young people to wait, there is something wrong when that encouragement is done by telling them how ruined their lives will be, and how much they've "lost" if (and most likely when) they do mess up. Maybe, instead of raising young people to be terrified of sex and the repercussions they'll face if they do mess up, Christian leaders should spend time talking about how amazing it can be when it's within the relationship for which it was intended.

Take note of that, Rebecca St. James!

 -When she wasn't (rightfully) calling out The Gospel Coalition, Rachel Held Evans was responding to Ross Douthat's god-awful article about liberal Christianity.

-And finally, even though this is actually from two weeks ago, Bruce Epperly explains how the Higgs Boson can be seen as a metaphor for how God is the center of everything.

The Dominating God

[Warning: possibly triggering for rape and abuse survivors]

It all started when Jared Wilson of the Calvinist think tank The Gospel Coalition wrote a blog post about the popularity of the book Fifty Shades of Grey. According to Jared, the book's BDSM themes resonate so much with female readers because . . . and this is where it gets confusing . . . egalitarianism leads to rape fantasies. He then cites a passage from Doug Wilson's (no relation) book Fidelity: What It Means To Be A One-Woman Man:

"Because we have forgotten the biblical concepts of true authority and submission, or more accurately, have rebelled against them, we have created a climate in which caricatures of authority and submission intrude upon our lives with violence.

When we quarrel with the way the world is, we find that the world has ways of getting back at us. In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts. This is of course offensive to all egalitarians, and so our culture has rebelled against the concept of authority and submission in marriage. This means that we have sought to suppress the concepts of authority and submission as they relate to the marriage bed.

But we cannot make gravity disappear just because we dislike it, and in the same way we find that our banished authority and submission comes back to us in pathological forms. This is what lies behind sexual “bondage and submission games,” along with very common rape fantasies. Men dream of being rapists, and women find themselves wistfully reading novels in which someone ravishes the “soon to be made willing” heroine. Those who deny they have any need for water at all will soon find themselves lusting after polluted water, but water nonetheless.

True authority and true submission are therefore an erotic necessity. When authority is honored according to the word of God it serves and protects — and gives enormous pleasure. When it is denied, the result is not “no authority,” but an authority which devours." [Emphasis mine]

Yeah, am I the only one who sees a problem with this passage?

Actually I'm not, because shortly after Jared hit the "publish" button, bloggers from all over theological spectrum called out Jared Wilson and The Gospel Coalition: Rachel Held Evans, Scot McKnight, Sarah Moon, and George Elerick, to name a few. Both Jared Wilson and Doug Wilson fired back and said they were definitely NOT condoning rape and abuse. And I'm sure neither one of the Wilsons meant to sound like they were.

But this whole debacle does bring up the underlying problem I see with the Neo-Reformed movement: a dominating God.

According to Calvinism (or at least the type of Calvinism as preached by John Piper and He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named), God has predetermined every single thing that happens in this life, including whether or not you're going to be a Christian. God has also set up a detailed structure for how human beings should relate to one another, which includes strict gender roles that no one should dare defy. And in this strict gender role system, men are always the alpha male while women are always the submissive subordinate. So in Calvinism, human relationships reflect God's nature, which, in this case, is dominating.

Of course, if you try to point this out to a Calvinist, he or she will usually flip open their ESV Bible and say, "God said it, I believe it, that settles it!" For the Calvinist, all 66 books of the Bible are literally the divinely dictated inerrant Word of God. Which, as most educated biblical scholars can tell you, is just simply not true. The Bible is a collection of books written over thousands of years by many different (human) authors trying to make sense of these incredible encounters they've had with God. Sometimes they get it right, and sometimes they don't. (For more information, see chapter seven of Leslie D. Weatherhead's The Christian Agnostic.)

But if you do what Tripp and Bo at Homebrewed Christianity suggest, and read the bop-bibbity-bop-Bible (a phrase I shameless stole from Tripp) using Jesus, the Living Word of God, as the hermaneutical lens, then things look quite different. For example, as I mention once before, a closer look at the Pauline gender rolls in Ephesians chapter 5 will reveal that Paul is actually calling for mutual submission between husbands and wives.

Now I'm not saying that Calvinist hermanuetics automatically lead to sexual abuse. That's taking things a bit too far! But I do believe that if you worship a dominating God, then you're gonna end up with some pretty unhealthy views on human relationships. I'm just sayin'!

*UPDATE 07/23/12: Jared Wilson has since apologized.

The Fear of God is the Beginning of Pain

 
Today I lashed out at a conservative/fundamentalist Christian on the Internet . . . again! This time I think I said at one point, "How about you put on some lipstick so you can kiss my ass?" Definitely one of my most creative put-downs, but I still shouldn't have let it go that far.

Even though I'm not fully justifying my actions, I will say that this particular person reminded me way too much of Amanda's* family. For Amanda's family, it was always their way or the highway. They were always right and everyone else was usually wrong. And of course, they always used the Bible to back themselves up. It wasn't healthy for me anymore. For years I thought that God was going to strike me down for not going with Amanda's family's plan.

My faith is in a much healthier place now, but I still fear Amanda's family's God. What if I'm wrong? What if God really is everything they said God was? I still want to believe in God, but whenever I meet anyone like Amanda's family, atheism seems like a much better option.

You would think that by now I would automatically know the difference between the real loving God and the bullshit fire-and-brimstone god, but I still have trouble. How can I know for sure? It's not like the clouds are going to open up and God is finally going to explain who/what God is any time soon. So I'm just left with speculation based on a collection of thousand year-old scripture written by men trying to make sense out of these spectacular encounters with the Divine.

I want to lose this unhealthy fear of God. I want to fully trust God and let God love me. But sometimes it feels like the fear is bigger than God.


(*From now on, I'm going to refer to my ex-fiancee as "Amanda" to protect the innocent.)

This Week In Cool Stuff: 07/14/12

Wow, there was a lot of cool stuff this week! Let's see if we can find the best of the best:

-Amy Mitchell at Unchained Faith calls out Joshua Harris for playing the "blame the victim" game with rape victims.

-Ashleigh Baker beautifully shares her moments of doubt over at A Deeper Story.

-Shay Kearns of The Anarchist Reverend has a case of imposter syndrome.

-Kathy Vestal at Red Letter Christians explains how God inspired--not wrote--the Bible.

-Christian Piatt presents the Top  29 Cliches Christians Should Avoid: Parts 1, 2, and 3.

-And finally, Sesame Street parodies "Call Me Maybe" with "Share It Maybe:"

Someday, Someway

Someday, someway...

...maybe I'll learn how to handle my emotions.

...maybe I'll learn to like myself.

...maybe I'll stop hurting myself.

...maybe I'll stop comparing and contrasting myself to other people.

...maybe I'll finally accept that I'm not infallible.

...maybe I'll learn to be okay with not having all the answers.

...maybe I'll finally be okay with being okay.

This Week In Cool Stuff: 07/06/12

-There's been a lot of talk this week about the discovery of the Higgs boson, a.k.a. "the God particle." Philip Clayton writes that, despite the Higgs boson's nickname, it neither proves nor disproves God's existence.

-Also in Homebrewed Christianity-related news, Tripp Fuller explains original sin using zombies as a metaphor.


-Paul DeBaufer explains to Christians how NOT to talk to an atheist. Money quote:

Listen to the Atheists, the Pagans, the Muslims, the Buddhists, to everybody and find where we intersect, where we have common belief, common experience. Then, and only then, can you even begin to even communicate.

-And finally, R&B singer and Odd Future group member Frank Ocean came out of the closet this week. On behalf of all Odd Future fans, let me voice my support with a big hearty "Golf Wang!"

Ten Books That Shaped My Faith

(Image shamelessly swiped from Sarah Bessey)

Sarah Bessey did it. So did Suzannah Paul. I guess it's my turn now.

Ladies and gentlemen, here are the Ten Books That Shaped My Faith (in no particular order):

1. A New Kind of Christianity by Brian McLaren. While not my all-time favorite McLaren book (that would be a tie between A New Kind of Christian and Everything Must Change), this was the book that first introduced me to a Christianity different from the evangelical one I only knew up to that point.

2. Blue Like Jazz by Donald Miller. While not as radical as A New Kind of Christianity, Miller reassured me that I was not the only evangelical that wanted something more out of life and faith.

3. Evolving in Monkey Town by Rachel Held Evans. Ever since I read one of her articles on Burnside Writers Collective, I knew that Evans was something special. This book gave me permission to ask questions and be at peace with not always having an answer.

4. The Ragamuffin Gospel by Brennan Manning. This book challenges my self-imposed legalism, and boggles my mind with God's love.

5. The Return of the Prodigal Son by Henri Nouwen. Like Manning, Nouwen also challenges me to give up my futile attempts to try to win God's favor and just accept that God actually loves me.

6. Reading the Bible Again for the First Time by Marcus Borg. Although I don't always agree with Borg, this book did change the way I view scripture. Instead of asking, "Did this really happen?" I know ask, "What does this story mean?"

7. The Politics of Jesus by John Howard Yoder. While not the easiest read in the world, Yoder's ideas made me rethink a lot of my previously held assumptions about the Christian's relationship to the State.

8. The Kingdom of God is Within You by Leo Tolstoy. Christian anarcho-pacifism for the win!

9. Surprised by Hope by N.T. Wright. Prior to reading this book, I always assumed that Jesus' resurrection was just some magic trick. After reading this book, I now know that it's much more than that.

10. Process Theology: A Guide for the Perplexed by Bruce Epperly. Tripp and Bo at Homebrewed Christianity may have gotten me interested in process theology, but Epperly got me hooked.

That Holy Anarchist - A Review

I don't know if I would consider myself an anarchist. Maybe more like anarch-ish. But there's no doubt that Christian anarchists such as Leo Tolstoy and Dorothy Day have greatly influenced me. And out of all of the political philosophies out there, Christian Anarchism is the one that I lean most towards. I just don't know if I would be considered a full-blown anarchist because I feel like I still let a lot of domination and oppression go by under my nose without even realizing it. Plus, as a hardcore introvert, the whole "intentional community" thing scares the shit out of me.

Nevertheless, Mark Van Steenwyk of Jesus Radicals and co-host of the podcast The Iconocast (seriously, when are you guys gonna give us another episode?) has just released a short primer on Christian anarchism called That Holy Anarchist. Think of it as Christian Anarchism 101 for people who are either interested in Christian anarchism--or "Christo-anarchism," as Mark puts it--or just want to know how in the heck a Christian can be an anarchist.

For Mark, it all goes back to Jesus the "unking:"

[W]hen Jesus said his kingdom wasn't of this world, he wasn't understood by Pilate or by the Jews or by his earliest followers as talking about the afterlife or some abstract spiritual truth. Based upon the lethal response to Jesus (and the early reactions to Jesus' movement), the "Kingdom of God" was understood as a challenge to Caesar and his reign. Their two kingdoms clashed. The kingdom of God that Jesus announced and embodied is what life would be like on earth, here and now, if God were king and the rulers of this world were not. Imagine if God ruled the nations. (13-14)

From there Mark gives a brief overview of anarchism, anarchist inclinations throughout Christian history, and misconceptions about Christo-anarchism (including that pesky Romans 13). The book ends with some practices Mark suggests that hopefully can help the Christo-anarchist stay focused on Jesus' example.

My only complaint about the book is that I wish it was a little big longer. But then again, the book is meant to be just a launching pad, and Mark is kind enough to include several resources for further reading. So if you are a Christo-anarchism novice, That Holy Anarchist is the book for you.

I give it four raised fists out of five!

Afraid to Create Something Beautiful?

As you've probably noticed, I haven't been updating my blog as much as I used to. It's not because I don't have any ideas. Far from it; I have a million ideas floating around in my head all the time! It's also not because I don't have enough time, because I could certainly make enough if I really wanted to.

The real reason why I don't blog as much as I used to is because I'm afraid.

I don't know if other creatives go through this, but blank pages intimidate me. They are so eager for me to do something with them that I tense up and want to do something else. And then I wonder why I don't get anything done!

Why am I afraid? Two reasons:


1. I'm afraid I'm going to write something really bad. Yes, Anne Lamott gave us all permission to write shitty first drafts, but I'm afraid I'm going to write something so shitty that I can't fix it.

2. I'm afraid of the vulnerability of the process. Since I tend to write very personal things, writing requires a lot of vulnerability and openness on my part. You would think that because I am so candid on my blog, opening up is easy for me. It's not. In fact, it's scary! Many times I find myself writing something painful that I don't want to face.

Of course once I hit the publish button, all of my readers respond, "Wow, Travis, thank you so much for sharing this!" But it's still scary and painful.

So I'm turning this over to you, dear reader: Do you ever find yourself afraid to create? What helps you get through your fear?