I intended on using this clip recently when wrapping up a series of talks on the discipline of Sabbath and rest.  I ran out of time (if you can imagine me talking too long). I think it’s reflective of the uphill battle one faces when trying to discover and maintain a healthy pace of life.

“…turning you… into an instrument of efficiency.”

The goal is efficiency. But not just efficiency as a general principle… efficiency a principle of productivity.  And in order to achieve that goal, one needs to become something more than human.  Namely, one must become a machine; shake off the limitations of his humanity in order to get more done.

In contrast to this image of man becoming machine is an image I found in Wendell Berry’s Jayber Crow of humanity as.. well.. as human.  After a series of disappointments and personal discoveries, Jayber rid himself of the one piece of efficiency-boosting machinery he had in his possession; his car.  He now lived, functioned and belonged only to his home-town of Port William.

“I felt older. I felt that I had seen ages of the world come and go.  I had lost every last twinge of the notion that I ought to get somewhere or make something of myself.  I was what I was…”

So, here I sit typing on my 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo MacBook with 4 GB of DDR3 RAM and 250GB of drive space watching my iPhone 3g ping to remind me of the text message I’ve not yet read and wondering about my pace of life.  What is it I am chasing that I run as fast as I often do? Success, as did my father? Fame, as I’m told I ought to as an artist? Or maybe it’s just the wind.

Over the past 2 years, my wife and I have implemented a weekly Sabbath, partially in order to step away from the pace of the Marketplace which fosters a need in us for the kind of machinery the above ad is selling (some of which, as you can see, I happily own) but also fosters in us the temptation to become machinery, subjecting ourselves to judgement on the scale of productivity and efficiency. The practice of Sabbath reminds me that I am what I am and that my value will not be established nor will it be shaken according to the work of my hands.

For those who caught the FEJMILRS webcast* last night, you were exposed to a new song. Note that I didn’t say you were “treated” to a new song. I would hardly be so assuming as to say that it was a treat… I can say that I liked it.  Below are the lyrics to the new song.  The working title is “What We Want.”  (no relation whatsoever to the 2000 film release entitled “What Women Want” starring Mel Gibson). It will be one of the songs that makes up my next project, which is a followup to the Untitled EP.

v1
It’s not about the drinking
It’s all about the being drunk
Like it’s not with whom you’re sleeping
It’s with whom you wake up

pre-chorus
It’s not about the wars you fight
it’s whether or not you win
Not so  much about being right
As not letting all the wrong ones in

Chorus
See, we all want that resurrection
But we don’t want to die
We all want that sweet salvation
WIthout the bitterness of sacrifice

v2
It’s not about forgiveness
It’s about making sure they know
You’re the one they’ve injured
You’re just too strong to let it show

v3
It’s not about believing
It’s about making it look good
So that when you lose your reason
You just keep doing what you should.

(**if you missed the FEJMILRS, there are rumors [and they are only rumors] that there will be further broadcasts.)

There were many responses at this blog to my “Open Letter to Anne Rice.”  A good bit over 100. I read all of them, though not every one of them was posted.**  I responded to most of those I read, particularly because I kept seeing the same set of basic assumptions popping up. I promise not to squeeze any more life out of this moment than there is, but below is a short(ish) response to two of the more prevalent assumptions underlying many reader comments. (PLEASE NOTE: this is not a further commentary on Anne Rice’s announcement; it is a response to common assumptions found in the reader comments on my initial letter)

The first prevalent assumption among those who commented on my previous post was that I am “an idiot.” Pffssst… chyeah, right.  Am not.

The second is that I am “a jackass.”  Now, that I can buy.

Actual Assumption #1:
The “Human Element” of Religion

There was, present in many of the comments posted, the assumption that one can remove the “human element” from religion.  It’s an immensely problematic idea and here is why I think so:  Many, if not most, would agree that religion is a human construct; that we made it up. Religion is either the way we go about seeking some Divine Source we can only hope and believe is really there underneath it all or it is our poetic and philosophical effort to make lemonade from the lemons of life.  Therefore, if one ascribes to this idea of religion, then all there is to it is the human element.  We are either reaching out for “God” who couldn’t possibly have had anything to do with this circus of dogmas and funny robes or we’re deluding ourselves in order to cope with the absurdity of life.

In that light, let’s suppose that one’s entire religious practice was made up of silent meditation alone in a room in an empty building in an abandoned city whose residents had been eaten by zombies who then, themselves died from side effects of the 5-Hour Energy Drink stored in the blood streams of the very alert people they had eaten (I’m just trying to paint a picture of isolation here… stick with me). Even in that very isolated scenario, the practice of meditation would have had to be learned from someone else.  Be it face to face or in written form or by instructional video, the transference of religious knowledge or spiritual practice is always a human process; People teaching people to be (ostensibly) better people. Religion is people.

So, if religion is a human construct and you remove the “human element” from it you are left with nothing.. which would make many among us just as happy… until the zombies show up.

But what if you are just crazy enough to believe that The Divine communicates directly to people?  Luckily, I am just such a nut. So is Anne Rice. We’re nuts, Anne and I!  You see, I believe, along with Anne Rice, that God has revealed Himself to His Creation over many, many years.  We believe that the pinnacle in this long history of revelation is the Incarnation of Jesus Christ; God becoming man.  This tradition makes the elimination of the “human element” problematic in that God, with every phase of revelation over the course of history, has intentionally and consistently chosen the human element; even to the extreme of becoming human. Prophets, Priests, Teachers, Guides, Rulers, etc.. all human, as was Jesus of Nazareth.  So while we might be a ripe mess, it seems that in some strange way we are the mess God wants.

Furthermore, this same tradition shuns the individualistic practice of faith in which religion is “just between God and me.”  The instructions or teachings that have accompanied each phase of revelation are communal instructions and teachings.   The teachings of Christ in particular are teachings spoken to crowds of people rather than to individuals.  They were/are designed to create a culture of forgiveness, generosity and hope rather than just individuals marked by those traits. Christ’s methods were and are communal: He called a group of twelve people to himself and taught them as a collective. He taught the masses who followed him.  Meanwhile, despite his deep criticism of Judaism, Jesus nonetheless continued to teach within that system; in its synagogues and to the communities gathered there around Torah.  I think it’s safe to say that, even if one is unsure as to His “agenda,” Jesus sought (and seeks) to accomplish his goal by reshaping the way people live, not as individuals, but together… until the  zombies show up.

Actual Assumption #2:
The “End” of Religious Practice

Lastly (I promise) throughout the comments, there seemed to be a further assumption that the practice of religion is intended for the improvement of ones self.  Agreed… but.  That is not it’s end.  A better self is particularly better insofar as that better self can then help other selves become better selves.  There is a responsibility that comes with health, blessing and wisdom; the responsibility to pass it on. The healing of our own lives becomes a gift we have the privilege and responsibility to offer others.  But even that is not the end.

The better self helps others be better selves and they, together, become better communities which, in turn, create better neighborhoods, better cities and better cultures which eventually, hopefully and prayerfully transform the face of nations and the globe into the shape and pattern of what Jesus called “the Kingdom.” Christ’s “end” from the very beginning was to redeem all things and all people, reconciling them to the Father and instating His Kingdom on earth as a dwelling place for all of God’s creation. A dwelling place with the foundations of Justice, Mercy and Love.  Any religious (or irreligious) idea which excludes an entire people group from this vision is out of line with that vision and its Architect.  In this light, if someone really “gets it,” the last thing one ought to do is disconnect themselves from those who don’t get it. George Bernard Shaw said it thusly: ”I am of the opinion that my life belongs to the whole community and as long as I live, it is my privilege to do for it whatever I can. I want to be thoroughly used up when I die.”

DISCLAIMER: All this is only my opinion, which I will continue to force down peoples’ throats by posting it here on my own blog where you are all morally and legally obliged to click and scroll until I am through controlling you; after which point you are free to move on and linger at the far more entertaining and informative Daily Show page.. That is, of course.. until the zombies show up.

**(comments I did not post were generally those that were only insulting without offering content… also ignored were any comments submitted by Yankee fans.)

I stumbled across Anne Rice’s decision to “give up” on christianity through the PatrolMag.com posting.  She had originally made the declaration on her Facebook Fan Page. After reading her statement, I felt compelled to write the below letter:

Dear Anne,

I am sure that this post is one among many responding to your announcement that you are disassociating yourself from Christianity.  You wrote that your disgust with “this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group” has led you to the conclusion that you “simply cannot belong” to us.

I feel you,  Anne. I really do.  I’ve had similar thoughts and even expressed them publicly. I don’t mind at all the desire or even the need to stand at some distance from the label of christianity.  It may well have been worn through.  But I take issue with the notion that you must disassociate  yourself from ‘christian’ people. I mean sure, we’re a motley lot.  Belonging to this family can often feel like you’ve adopted a few thousand drunk uncles.  It’s incredibly embarrassing at times and frustrating at least as often. I get it.  But I also read that you’re making your move “in the name of Christ” and that presents a rather perplexing dilemma for someone who wants to quit on people.  You see, Christ hasn’t quit on us and if you choose to align yourself with Him, then neither can you.

Aligning yourself with Christ means aligning yourself with Someone who not only declared his love for all God’s children (believer or not), but suffered and died in order to establish and maintain a relationship with those children.  It is this redemptive sacrifice that defines His love as characteristically His.  Having chosen to follow His example, it seems that at least part of the redemptive sacrifice you are being challenged to make is to associate and identify yourself with this shabby batch of miscreants who are often quite bad at practicing the religion you love.  It comes at the cost of your ego and likely some book sales.  But that’s the nature of sacrifice; it costs you. It will cost you if people see you as being family to those “anti-gay, anti-feminist, anti-artificial birth, anti-Democrat, anti-secular humanism, anti-science” types among us.  Just as it costs Jesus to be seen as their Savior and Lord. Just as it cost him to be seen with prostitutes and whatnot.  It is the same social role-play with a different set of cultural lenses on. All your statement does is trade in “bigots” for “whores” when the heart of Christ is that they’re both beloved of the Father.

It’s simply reasonable that if you set yourself against people who set themselves against people you are only adding to the friction. If part of your issue with christianity is it’s exclusivity, you aren’t helping by only including those who “get it” the way you do.  True christian inclusivity means embracing the homosexual and the gay-basher in the same embrace; working for the release of the oppressed while praying and working for the redemption of their oppressor; loving the beautiful game of baseball and yet, somehow, also loving the Yankees.  It means loving the Lord with all of yourself and also loving those who grossly misrepresent Him.

I think you’re smart, Anne. I think you’ll hear some thoughtful feedback and realize you stepped across a line and might have to retract your statement.  You will also likely have to speak directly with Christ about the way you roughly labeled and dismissed the ones He’s drawn to himself and suffered to love.  Lucky for you, lucky for all of us, He’s incredibly forgiving and eternally patient.

In the name of Christ,
Justin McRoberts

Come one, come all to the First Ever Justin McRoberts Interactive Living Room Session (FEJMILRS) Wednesday night August 18 6pm PST. This unique event will be a 20-minute, live webcast made up of menagerie of interview questions (submitted by you), a performance of an old McRoberts favorite (to be voted on!), a performance of a song from Justin’s recent covers album (also to be voted on! ) and a sneak peak at a new song from Justin’s upcoming project, Untitled volume 2.

How does a FEJMILRS work? It works in 3 easy steps…

1. SUBMIT: your questions and requests over Twitter before Friday, Aug 13. The top 10 questions will be answered in no specific order.

2. WATCH: live via Twitcam Wednesday night August 18 6pm PST. The stream will be accessible through Justin’s Twitter page. Or watch the session when it re-airs on FOX this Fall.**

3. RECEIVE: If your question is answered during the session, you will receive a $2-Off coupon for any digital album at the McStore.  Keep posted at Twitter or Facebook for further details.

(**FOX airing pending FEJMILRS being picked up by a production company and inking a contract with FOX… so.. you should probably just watch it on Wed, Aug 18.)