John H Armstrong

Is It Necessary to Be Sexually Active to Order to Be a Healthy, Flourishing Person?

This is a rather amazing piece of popular television dialogue. You will clearly note that Tim Gunn does not take a moral position about sexual practice in his comments. So, at least for a moment, please leave the moral questions off the table. Watch this short clip for what it says and how the speaker actually says it, as well as the context in which he says it. His words clearly challenge the regnant modern Western idea that sexual experience is as necessary (almost) as food, clothing and shelter. If you are a sexual person, and all of us are created as sexual persons, then the argument generally made by our culture is that you should either be having sex or preparing and planning on having sex sooner than later. Why? Sexual expression is normal and human. It is a part of who you are and without it you can express yourself in love and relationships. If you choose to remain celebrate then you are abnormal, or so much of the culture seems to say in our modern debates about this issue. It is this thesis that I believe we should profoundly and patiently challenge, regardless of our moral perspective. We need to seek common ground where we can find it and this is genuinely a place to start a serious conversation. We might disagree about some verses of Scripture (as serious Christians do) but the question remains: "Must normal adults with strong sexual inclinations be sexually acitivite in order to be healthy people with great friendships and full lives?" The dominant answer is clear! But should we listen to the Tim Gunn's narrative and consider seeing this question differently?

   

You will note that Tim Gunn is still a homosexual by his own definition yet he has not had an active sexual relationship for 29 years. Watch the response of the panel and see how they are "silenced" by the clarity and integrity of Tim's simple narrative and earnest response. I wonder if they thought to themselves, "This guy is really strange!" (I'm not taking a shot at the persons on this program but their body-langauge, and what one says just before Tim tells his own story, is rather clear.) I wonder if the hosts of this show, and many viewers, were stunned to actually realize that a person can be a healthy and normal human person (in this case a homosexual person) without having sex? I would love to have seen this question discussed openly. I hope we can inject this type of discussion into the sexual narrative that we communicate in our culture. 

I suggest that this entire debate (whether about homosexuality or heterosexuality) needs to move toward the discussion Tim Gunn's narrative creates if we are to get away from the persective that we have so widely accepted as completely normal. 

What Are Conservative Bona Fides?

In the Monday evening political debate in Tampa interviewer Brian Williams asked Governor Mitt Romney what his conservative credentials were? It was a kind of open-ended question and Romney appeared stumped, at least according to many reports and what you can see on the video of the moment. His answer has been criticized by the pundits in the news coverage since last night. Here is Romney's answer "Well, number one, I've raised a family," he said. "And I've -- I've -- with my wife, we've raised five wonderful sons, and we have 16 wonderful grandkids." A real gaffe right?

Governor Romney went on to reference his private sector background and his gubernatorial experience, but the reference to his family will stick says another morning critic. The reporter adds, "Romney had a chance to brandish his conservative bona fides and instead gave Republicans a somewhat nonsensical response about his number of children. It's not clear how raising a family ties to contributing to the conservative movement in the Republican Party” (emphasis mine).  

I do not report this exchange to either endorse Romney nor to comment on whether or not he was actually well-prepared to answer it, which it appears he was not. He really did seem caught off guard and thus he spoke off the cuff, maybe from the heart. (Ironically it is said that he does not do this well, being so well trained and not-so-genuine in his manner.)

Here was the general conclusion of much of the press, at least as given in the morning news:

Romney's answer highlights his inability to connect to many rank-and-file members of the conservative movement, a problem that's continued to haunt him after his stunning defeat in South Carolina last week. He's skilled at detailing the X's and O's of policy, but his efforts to prove he's a rock-ribbed conservative often come up short.

So let me see if I understand this point. Romney's initial, unrehearsed, appeal to being a father and grandfather came up short in demonstrating that he is a real conservative. I understand differences in political philosophy really do matter. I also understand that Romney was not well prepared for this question, or perhaps it was just a bad moment. But when pushed about his conservatism Romney appealed to family in the spur of a moment. 

I am sure of one thing about the present cultural decline that we are experiencing. Every major indicator reveals that our schools and related community activities are failing precisely because families are falling apart and the family structure is in massive disarray and radical redefinition. Charles Murray's newest research reveals this to be the case, except among the wealthiest and best-educated. Perhaps the greatest single indicator/predictor of "success" in one's personal life is rooted in their family system and social background. I would think conservatives, of all people, recognized this clearly. I guess I am wrong in my assumption. After all, the candidate who is on fire right now is no paragon of family values. I get the feeling the term "conservative" is about as useless a term to describe anything important as the opposite word is in so many cases. I'm weary of the words and the process and it is still January. Don't we know that none of these candidates can truly make a big difference in the wider culture?

 

"A Bible and a Radio, But No Church"

One of the leading evangelical and ecumenical theologians of our time is Thomas C. Oden. Tom turned 80 last fall and continues to write magnificent works that serve the wider catholic community. He has provided the church with a fresh treasure of magnificent written work that will survive him by decades. You can sample something of Tom's story, a story of of how he turned away from theological liberalism in particular, in an online article that is well worth reading. 

I have had the privilege of knowing Tom for the past ten years-plus, though we are not extremely close as friends. We have served together in one specific ministry context which allowed us to talk and share several times in private. I count Tom among my Top Ten modern Christian thinkers and writers. In an aticle in Christianity Today, published in 2011, Tom wrote:

Christ promised the early church the Spirit, who came on the first Pentecost and continues to dwell in the lives of the faithful. He promised that the Spirit would abide with this community, guide it, lead it to all truth, and help it recollect the words of the Lord. This is just what has been happening for the 20 centuries since the ascension. We’re moving in the wrong direction when we say individualistically, “I’ve got my Bible; I don’t need anything except these words.” Protestants now need to recover a sense of the active work of the Spirit in history and through living communities. Our modern individualism too easily tempts us to take our Bible and abstract ourselves from the wider believing community. We end up with a Bible and a radio, but no church.

I have been reading a lot of Facebook posts recently. I am increasingly sensing that there is real value in using the social media to build ongoing conversations that can become healthy relationships. It is also a way to build up existing relationships through further social contact. Either way the social media cannot replace the biblical emphasis on real human relationships that must be found in community with real people. These relationships can not simply be virtual conversations. Oden explains why this is so in the quotation above.

I believe the majority of evangelical Christians that I've met over my long lifetime have a Bible and a radio/tape/CD/conference experience (fill in the blank), but NO church. Yes, some still go to a church but increasingly I hear of friends who are abandoning real church for all kinds of fads that suggest they believe we can be healthy disciples without the physical/spiritual reality of meeting with real embodied people where we pray with them, sing with them, weep with them, laugh with them and receive the body and blood of Christ with them. 

A few days ago I took communion around the front of my church at the Table. The people were positioned in such a way that I was literally touching the shoulders of the persons on my right and left as I took the sacrament. I was reminded by this simple embodied experience that Communion is a spiritual high point precisely because it is taken in the flesh with others standing/kneeling beside me. Anything less is not full-orbed Christian practice. Think about the physical aspect of this deeply spiritual experience and remember that if all you have is a Bible and ______ then you do not have a church. 

The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity

There is a long history behind the worldwide call to prayer for Christian unity but I became acutely aware of the history of this call at the Center for Unity in Rome last March. Then in June, about an hour north of New York City,  I visited the grave site of Fr. Paul Wattson, the man who launched this global week of prayer for Christian unity. As deeply interested as I am in this subject I am pleased to share news today from the Vatican Information Service of January 18. The Pope's comments provide a gracious reminder of our common duty to the whole of Christ's Church, not just our own communion or fellowship. 

INVOKING THE GIFT OF UNITY AMONG CHRISTIANS

VATICAN CITY, 18 JAN 2012 (VIS) - The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity, which begins today, was the theme of Benedict XVI's general audience celebrated this morning in the Paul VI Hall. The Holy Father explained how this initiative has been held annually for more than a century and brings together Christians from Churches and ecclesial communities, who "invoke that extraordinary gift for which the Lord Jesus prayed during the Last Supper: . . . 'That they may all be one.'"

The Week of Prayer - established in 1908 by Paul Wattson, founder of an Anglican religious community who later entered the Catholic Church - "is one of the most effective annual expressions . . . of the impetus which Vatican Council II gave to the search for full union among all Christ's disciples", said the Pope. "This spiritual event, which unites Christians from all traditions, increases our awareness of the fact that the unity we strive for cannot result merely from our own efforts; rather, it is a gift we receive and must constantly invoke from on high."

The texts for this year's Week of Prayer have been prepared by a group of representatives from the Catholic Church, and from the Polish Ecumenical Council which proposed the theme of "We will all be changed by the victory of our Lord Jesus Christ." The history of Poland - marked by defeats and victories, by the struggle to end oppression and achieve freedom - led the ecumenical group to reflect more deeply upon what it means to "win" and to "lose."

In this context the Pope pointed out that, "in contrast to 'victory' understood in triumphal terms, Christ shows us a very different way. His victory does not involve power and might. . . . Christ speaks of victory through love, mutual assistance and boosting the self-esteem of those who are 'last', forgotten, excluded. For all Christians, the best expression of such humble service is Jesus Christ Himself, His total gift of self, the victory of His love over death. . . . We can share in this 'victory' only if we allow ourselves to be transformed by God."

Likewise, "the unity for which we pray requires inner conversion, both shared and individual. But this must not be limited to cordiality and cooperation; we must reinforce our faith in God; ... we must enter into the new life in Christ, Who is our true and definitive victory; we must open to one another, accepting all the elements of unity which God has conserved for us; . . . we must feel the pressing need to bear witness, before the men and women of our time, to the living God Who made Himself known in Christ."

Ecumenism, as defined by Vatican Council II and Blessed John Paul II, is "the responsibility of the entire Church and of all the baptised, who must augment the partial communion that already exists among Christians until achieving full communion in truth and charity. Praying for unity . . . must then be an integral part of the prayer life of all Christians, in all times and places, especially when people from different traditions come together to work for victory in Christ over sin, evil, injustice and the violation of human dignity."

Benedict XVI also pointed out that "lack of unity among Christians hinders the effective announcement of the Gospel and endangers our credibility," but noted that, "as far as the fundamental truths of the faith are concerned, there is far more that unites us than divides us. . . . This is a great challenge for the new evangelisation, which will be more fruitful if all Christians together announce the truth of the Gospel and Jesus Christ, and give a joint response to the spiritual thirst of our times."

In conclusion, the Pope exhorted the faithful to unite more intensely in prayer during the course of the coming Week, "to increase shared witness, solidarity and collaboration among Christians, in expectation of that glorious day when together we will all be able to celebrate the Sacraments and profess the faith transmitted by the Apostles."

 

When Jesus Met Mary: A Sacred Friendship Gathering

This unique event, hosted by my dear friend, author and speaker Dan Brennan, will feature several interesting and engaging speakers, including yours truly. It will present a great opportunity for a kind of dialogue not generally welcomed in the church at large and includes a special opportunity to meet new friends in genuine conversation and fellowship. Please consider attending. Here is more information:

 

When Jesus Met Mary: A Sacred Friendship Gathering

Chicago, Illinois

April 27^th-28^th, 2012

A Conference Exploring Friendship Between Men and Women

Contact: Dan at [sacredfriendshipgathering@gmail.com]

When men and women come together, are the only options romance or danger?  Is sex the subtext of every male-female friendship?  Is true male-female friendship ever possible without uncomfortable tension, cynicism or second-guessing?

When Jesus met Mary in the garden, it was in friendship.  In the Gospel of John, before marriage, family or community, the risen Christ first attended to friendship.  Is it possible that we can learn to do the same - to build and attend to deep friendships for their own sake?  What would our marriages, relationships, churches and communities look like if men and women were not afraid of connecting with each other in deep friendship? 

On April 27^th and 28^th in Long Grove, Illinois, (a Chicago suburb) gather together with Kathy Escobar, Jim Henderson, Meredith Efken, John Armstrong, Katie Driver and Dan Brennan for a conversation about the power and potential of spiritual friendships between men and women. Join with other Christians who believe that Jesus has called us to a third way of being together, beyond fears, skepticism, myths and stereotypes. Together we will learn to be more like Jesus and Mary in the garden.

For more information, go to [http://sacredfriendshipgathering.com/]

Join us on Facebook: [https://www.facebook.com/events/227759470633542/]