My new video: Where do we go when we die?
April 27th, 2010Public School Cuts Run Deep
April 14th, 2010NewSpin
By Christian Piatt
Originally published in PULP
Call it schadenfreude, but I couldnt help but smile when I read about Dr. John Covington, former Pueblo City Schools superintendent, having to contend with the ugly business of shutting down nearly half of Kansas Citys public schools. Granted, it was clear when he split town for the Midwest that he was entering a hot mess of a district.
But hey, when upward mobility calls, right?
Despite my sadistic need for karma to beat up Covington a little, the closure of 29 schools is nothing short of a crisis for children and families living in the city. Such a dire situation makes some of the recent developments in our own back yard a little easier to swallow.
Schools District 70 announced that, as of next year, it will be cutting back to four-day school weeks to try to balance the budget. Naturally, parents are concerned about the quality of their kids education, young ones taking the bus in the dark and what to do with the little buggers an extra day of the week when the rest of the world works.
Many parents in Pueblo are barely making ends meet as it is, particularly in outlying areas covered by District 70, and the challenge of paying for an extra day of child care every week might be the difference between making the car payment and giving it up to the bank. Obviously, the schools are trying to save money, so to stay open just to babysit would make no sense, but what to do?
As a vocal advocate that churches and community service groups should step up when theres an identifiable need, this is a great opportunity to put words into real action. Some churches offer parents night out or daytime relief once a month or so for caregivers. But if retired, unemployed or underemployed congregants could provide a safe haven for children to play and continue learning, it might actually help all of us justify those big buildings that, too often, only get used on Sunday mornings.
The busing issue is more easily addressed. True, there might be days when the buses have to run in darkness or at least twilight, but how many parents are content to leave their children at a bus stop on their own, even in broad daylight? I realize that rural areas tend to create a climate where everyone knows everybody else, but given the fact that sexual crimes against children are usually committed by relatives or family friends, this is hardly an excuse for a lack of vigilance.
When I rode the bus to school the city bus, mind you, not a school bus in Dallas, my folks stayed with me until the bus came. Yes, it took time, but it also communicated to me that my safety was a priority. Sometimes wed carpool and parents would take turns at this job, but even in the winter months when the bus ran into the evening, I knew there was always someone waiting for me on the other end.
Regarding the quality of education, the comments of a teacher friend of mine from District 70 makes the point well. She explained that, given busing schedules as they are now, combined with all the transitions kids have from one class or program to another, its hard for teachers to pack in all the curriculum-mandated material theyre expected to cover.
With the four-day schedule, she explained, teachers will still have the same number of contact hours in a week, but with one-fifth fewer transitions. This means longer periods of contact in the classroom, and, according to her, a better chance to cover important content than in a five-day system.
This still doesnt point to the 800-pound gorilla in the room, the absurdity of a donut-shaped district the educators and administrators are struggling to manage. Meanwhile, Pueblo City Schools sit square in the middle of it all, with some of its schools much closer to District 70 facilities than other schools in their own district.
Its understandable how reluctant either district may be to consider redrawing district lines or cost-sharing more than they already do, but considering what Kansas City schools are now facing, reshuffling the deck sounds like a much less bitter pill to swallow if funding continues to lag.
Finally, this still doesnt address the other problem we have in Southern Colorado, which is the value or lack of it that we seem to place on public school funding. Ours is one of the absolute lowest in per-capita funding of public education compared to income, and within Colorado, our two districts are near the bottom of that miserable pile.
I understand the resistance to raising taxes, particularly when were all hurting financially. But the old adage, you get what you pay for, tells only part of the story when it comes to childrens minds. Actually, the lack of investment will have a negative ripple effect, for decades to come, in the form of overburdened social services, swelling criminal-justice dockets, teen pregnancies, dropouts and substance abuse growing unchecked.
Maybe the more appropriate saying is pay now, or pay later. The four-day week may be relatively good news, compared to what may be coming if we dont step up to support public education. Unless were looking for John Hatchet Man Covington to come back our way and work similar magic for our kids, its time to make big changes while we still have a chance.
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell…in Church?
April 9th, 2010Dont Ask, Dont Tell
in Church?
By Christian Piatt
Originally published in PULP
Lots of adjectives have been attached to my name in the past, but provocative is one that seems to keep sticking. As a writer of mainly theological material, its expected that Ill use certain buzzwords and will avoid some topics that simply should not be talked about in polite company, let alone church.
Sounds like a challenge. I like challenges.
Enter the new book series Im co-creating and editing for Chalice Press, called Wheres the Faith? The acronym by which the series is known is WTF?, a brief nod to the provocateur in me. Part of the idea behind this series of books on matters of young adults and faith is to tackle the issues were supposedly not allowed to, so of course, the first book out of the gate had to be about sex.
After about eighteen months of planning and hard work, Oh God, Oh God, OH GOD: Young adults speak out about sexuality and Christian Spirituality hit the streets to at least so far rave reviews. The common sentiment, at least from those who will actually pick the thing up, is that its about time we started talking about things like alternatives to abstinence-only sex education, homosexuality, pornography and other hot-button topics.
For the essay on homosexuality, I was excited to bring on my friend, Shannon, who attended seminary as an openly gay man with my wife, Amy, back in Texas. In his essay, Growing Up Gay, he talks in both humorous and heartbreaking terms about what its like being a man living in a faith calling, while also being transparent about his sexual orientation.
I was afraid of being stabbed in the middle of the night, he writes, recalling his childhood in North Carolina, and of being kidnapped, of being beaten up by the bully at school, of failing my grade and of missing the rapture. I was most afraid, however, of being different in general and of being gay in particular. I didnt want to be laughed at and made fun of and called names. Instead, I just wanted to fit in and be like everyone else.
As one who serves in a local church, I can tell you that working in ministry isnt exactly the best way to blend in. But he feels led to a life of spiritual service, sexuality aside, and so the long, uphill climb began.
Actually, the phrase sexuality aside doesnt exactly fit the situation, as I learned while watching him struggle through the ordination process. When a seminary student completes his or her graduate school requirements and practical ministry work in our denomination, they may apply to be ordained by a team of other ministers in their region. Our denomination, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), varies widely from region to region in policies, given that we have an intentionally weak central governance structure.
But this also means that, while some states or regions will gladly ordain openly gay ministers, others are less affirming, or even tolerant. No surprise that Fort Worth, Texas, fell into the less affirming category. Basically, they take the Bill Clinton approach to this issue, which is dont ask, dont tell, at least during the ordination process. This creates a system that, put simply, asks people seeking a life in ministry to lie or obfuscate to their peers.
Everyone on the ordination committee who knew Shannon knew he was gay, and if you meet him, its not exactly hard to figure out. I mean, the guy has a poster of Barbara Streisand in his entryway, for Gods sake. But he was advised to make his sexuality a non-issue as he moved through the process, buying into the game long enough to get his certification, at least.
Easy enough for someone who is straight to say. As a left-handed person in a right-handed world, I notice how very little righties think about being right-handed. But we lefties encounter things every day, from scissors to keyboards and so on, that make real the bias of the world against our nature.
I can only imagine the anger and disappointment Shannon must have felt in being told that something so central to his identity was a non-issue. On the contrary, his sexual orientation had everything to do with his ministry. Not that he wanted to start a gay church or anything, but it pointed to the very issues of justice and compassion of which he has become an unfortunate object lesson, far too many times.
So he came out to the committee and forced its members to deny him ordination because of his orientation, which they did. Several times in years since, he has considered leaving the ministry, though we encourage him to hang in there. After all, why would the systems ever change if theres no one on the inside trying to break down the old walls of intolerance?
Its tragic, though, that his road is so much harder than ours, simply because of who he is. What in the world would Jesus think?
First vid: We’re ALL Social Justice Christians
April 7th, 2010Rob Bell’s “Resurrection”
April 4th, 2010
Jesus is standing in front of the temple in Jerusalem
the massive gleaming brick and stone and gold house of God
and he says destroy this temple
and Ill rebuild it in three days
the people listening to him said how are you going to do that?
it took 46 years to build this temple!
but he wasnt talking about that temple
hes talking about himself
he essentially says, listen
Im going to be killed
thats where this is headed
because you dont confront corrupt systems of power
without paying for it
sometimes with your own blood
and so hes headed to his execution
if you had witnessed this divine life extinguished on a cross
how would you not be overwhelmed with despair?
is the world ultimately a cold, hard, dead place?
does death have the last word?
is it truly, honestly, actually dark
and so whatever light we do see
whatever good we do stumble upon
are those just blips on the radar?
momentary interruptions in an otherwise meaningless existence?
because if thats the case then despair is the
only reasonable response
its easy to be cynical
but Jesus says destroy this temple and Ill rebuild it
he insists that his execution would not be the end
hes talking about something new and unexpected
happening after his death
hes talking about resurrection
resurrection announces that God has not given up on the world
because this world matters
this world that we call home
dirt and blood and sweat and skin and light and water
this world that God is redeeming and restoring and renewing
greed and violence and abuse they are not right
and they cannot last
they belong to death and death does not belong
resurrection says that what we do with our lives matters
in this body
the one that we inhabit right now
every act of compassion matters
every work of art that celebrates the good and the true matters
every fair and honest act of business and trade
every kind word
they all belong and they will all go on in Gods good world
nothing will be forgotten
nothing will be wasted
it all has its place
everybody believes something
everybody believes somebody
Jesus invites us to trust resurrection
that every glimmer of good
every hint of hope
every impulse that elevates the soul
is a sign, a taste, a glimpse
of how things actually are
and how things will ultimately be
resurrection affirms this life and the next
as a seamless reality
embraced
graced
and saved by God
there is an unexpected mysterious presence
who meets each of us in our lowest moments
when we have no strength when we have nothing left
and we cant go on we hear the voice that speaks those
words
destroy this temple and Ill rebuild it
do you believe this?
thats the question Jesus asked then
and thats the question he asks now
Jesus friends arrive at his tomb and theyre told
he isnt here
you didnt see that coming, did you?
hes isnt here
there is nothing to fear
and nothing can ever be the same again
we are living in a world in the midst of rescue
with endless unexpected possibilities
they will take my life and I will die Jesus says
but that will not be the end
and when you find yourself assuming that its over
when its lost, gone, broken and it could never be
put back together again,
when its been destroyed and you swear that it could never
be rebuilt
hold on a minute
because in that moment
things will in fact have just begun
When “Social Marketing” does more harm than good
March 31st, 2010My wife, Amy and I were watching TV the other night, and a series of commercials came on that told me a lot about who the sponsors of the show thought I was. First, there was a Pepsi ad for this program they have where they give grants to people with good, community-changing ideas. Second was a Sun Chips commercial touting their new compostable packaging.
I remarked to Amy about how prevalent this kind of social marketing had become, and did so with no small amount of disdain in my voice, I expect, based on the way she looked at me.
Basically, its popular these days for companies to tout their social responsibility to help persuade you to buy their product. From Sun Chips (owned by junk food giant Frito Lay) to Pepsi, and even Coke with their every time you drink our sugary, caffeine-laced soda, youre participating in worldwide recycling promotion, everyone wants to get in on the action. Of course, food and beverage manufacturers arent the only ones getting in on the action. Car manufacturers, clothing designers and all manner of retail chains try hard to give you wamr fuzzies about their products.
On the surface, I know it seems cynical to grumble about companies trying to be socially responsible, even if it only is to better their bottom line. After all, if the result is the same, who cares what their motivation really is, right? But the concern I have hearkens back to my time-tested theory about capitalism at the consumer-level, which is that companies try hard to make us feel good about buying their stuff, and we agree not to ask too many questions, because wed rather feel good (even if falsely or superficially) about getting what we want rather than doing the hard work of digging deeper for truth and God forbid maybe having to sacrifice some wants for our ethics.
First, we should never take a company at their word that what theyre doing is good for us or the planet. As an example, heres a recent mention about Sun Chips installation of a ten-acre field of solar panels to help operate one of their factories, for which they won an Effie. This award, it turns out, is not an environmental award, but rather an effectiveness in marketing recognition. This from Effies website:
On Earth Day 2008, Sun Chips factory in Modesto, Calif., opened a 10-acre solar grid so that Sun Chips would be made with solar energy. However, the brands users were not hard-core green consumers, and they didnt care to hear about the details. They just wanted to know they were doing something a little better.
Im not saying this move to solar is a bad thing, but there are a few questions Im left wondering about (though evidently, the marketing folks are clear that the general population doesnt really care):
What percentage of the factorys total consumption is generated by solar?
Was this part of a government mandate for communities/companies to get certain percentages of their energy from renewable sources, or was it voluntary?
Does the company have any standards for their suppliers and the way they grow, harvest and transport their products?
In short, the idea is to find out if this company seriously is committed to the values theyre promoting, or if its simply a photo-op. Before we give ourselves pats on the back for being responsible consumers, we should try to find out.
Second, and perhaps more important, I have concerns that we allow companies who engage in this kind of social marketing to assuage our guilt for our way of life, allowing us to feel like weve done our good deed simply buy buying a soft drink or eating chips. Yes, guiding our dollars to more responsible outlets is an important thing to consider, but this doesnt let us off the hook as human beings, responsible for the care of ourselves, our fellow human beings and the planet. Its not unlike how some folks figure they dont have to work hard at making the world a better place all week long, just because they go to church on Sunday.
If the companies we support truly are walking the talk, and if we can verify this, more power to them, and more power to us to support their efforts with our money. And if guiding our purchases in such a way is simply a reflection of a greater effort in all parts of our lives to do right by ourselves and our world, thats great.
But lets not fool ourselves; just because we drink Fat Tire instead of Miller Lite or buy our gifts from 10,000 Villages doesnt mean we dont have a hell of a lot of work left to do.
Can Protestants be “too Catholic?”
March 29th, 2010I posted a comment on my Facebook Page and Twitter Page recently about how it seems ironic to me that so many churches who focus on atonement theology (the idea that Jesus died for your sins as central to what they believe) seems to jump right past Holy Week and on to Easter.
It seems to me that someone who preaches about and studies the death and suffering of Christ so much the rest of the year would have a field day emphasizing this central tenet of their beliefs on Maundy Thursday and Good Friday. But most of the churches in town that I know focus on this kind of image of Jesus have had slogans like Christ is Risen! on their signs for a couple of weeks already.
But can we really celebrate the resurrection, whatever meaning that takes on for your and your church, if we skip over the crucifixion? Moreover, arent we missing something if we dont participate in the Passover Seder meal on the Thursday before Easter? Yes, this is traditionally a Jewish ritual, but it is, after all the meal that took place at the Last Supper.
(Side note: I know this is shocking stuff for some, but Jesus wasnt a Christian; he was a Jew.)
Some of the responses I got to this comment were more lighthearted, pointing out that those who emphasize death and suffering so much year-round may see Easter as a time to take a little break, albeit maybe poorly timed. But Liesl, another friend of mine, pointed out that, in the church of her childhood, the reason Holy Week was not observed is because it is too Papist.
Basically, what shes saying is that, since Protestants broke away from the Catholic Church thanks to Martin Luther (the root meaning of Protestant is protest against many teachings of the Catholic church at the time), its in our theological DNA to reject all things Catholic. Since the Reformation, lost of us have defined ourselves more by what were not like in the Catholic tradition than by what we are though. And frankly, I think weve missed out on a lot of good things the Catholic church does really well.
As for Disciples in particular (the denomination of my wife and me, who co-founded Milagro Christian Church together six years ago), we have a real opportunity to connect with people who have some historical connection with Catholicism, but who do not actively participate in that church tradition any more. For one, we observe communion every week, much like the Catholic church, but rather than placing the church in a position of arbiter over who is fit to receive it or not, most Disciples churches observe an Open Table, which means that its not up to us as leaders to determine your fitness to take communion. We offer it to all people; whether you choose to take it is between you and God.
The fact that some of us also observe the liturgical calendar (observation of holy Week and following the Lectionary, among others) also appeals to a lot of people who are Catholic, and yet they find an openness in our lack of creeds or dogma that gets them past whatever alienated them from church in the past. As for Milagro, nearly half of our congregation is made up of these kinds of folks. so for us, the connection to Catholicism is not only valuable to enrich our sense of connectedness to deeper tradition; its a part of who we are today, as a faith community.
We do, however, have a couple of folks who respectfully decline to participate in thins like out Maundy Thursday, Passover Seder and Good Friday services namely because they feel too Catholic or too not-Christian. Here, we just agree to disagree, though I cant help but think theyre missing out on a broader perspective on their faiths of origin.
(Another side note: its common practice here in Pueblo to ask folks, Are you Catholic or Christian? is if the two are mutually exclusive. Weird.
So Im curious what others think. Do you feel like we may have gone a little too far with the Reformation, losing out on things like images and theology of the Divine Feminine, Holy Week and the like? Or is it important to maintain a cleaner break, setting ourselves apart from the faiths of Judaism and Catholicism that we came from? For that matter, is there value in digging deeper, looking into even things like Gnosticism, Zoroastrianism and other Pagan beliefs that informed many sacred practices we still embrace today?
Let me know what you think.
An open letter to critics of health care reform
March 24th, 2010
I understand that not everyone is a fan of the changes coming with the new health care reform legislation. However, I expect most can understand why at least the 32 million people anticipating having some kind of coverage would beg to differ.
This is not my issue. My beef is with the fear-mongering about the government takeover of health care. this is a broken system, and most of us simply find basic health care and insurance untenable. Its been a problem for decades and nothing substantial has been done, so kudos to those lawmakers who bucked up and spent some political capital to do SOMETHING. But in debating the laws implications, lets stick to logistics rather than capitalizing on fear of big government to polarize public opinion.
I would also suggest that such rhetoric is hypocritical for anyone benefiting from any of the following taxpayer-supported programs, which we have no choice but to support through our taxes:
Medicare
VA Benefits
Public Education (this includes state universities)
Social Security
Transportation systems (you drive on a road I/we paid for with our taxes)
I could go on, but the point is that ALL of us benefit from taxpayer-supported programs. Sure, health care is a huge portion of our national economy, but how about national defense? Ive yet to hear a tea party activist complain about their tax dollar going to missile systems or to fund internment camps for enemy combatants. Why is this? isnt the health of our citizenry at least as important?
For me, this is an issue of theological importance. If Jesus were here today, it would be hard to argue that he wouldnt chastise us for our treatment of the poor and less privileged, here in the wealthiest country in the world. And while Id love to see our communities address this and other issues without government intervention, how much longer do we wait? How many more thousands/millions should remain sick or die while we debate how to best reform a broken health care system? How many more decades should we say is acceptable until we say enough?
Its not a perfect bill, and no one is saying it is. But thank God something is changing. At least now were taking some responsibility for one of the most sorely neglected issues of social justice weve yet to content with as a nation.
My LOST prediction: Who will be the hero?
March 23rd, 2010
In a recent interview for a radio show about LOST, I was asked a lot about the coming end of the show, including who I thought the hero or heroes ultimately would be. Though I honestly hadnt thought much about it, the person that we all tended to agree on surprised even me:
Hurley.
Thats right, the dude man. After I thought a little more about it, the long-shot idea began to make more sense. Thinking about the theme of redemption and transformation throughout the show, all the main characters have gone through major personal revelations, eschewing their spotty pasts for a second chance at a new life on the island. Some have done better than others with this second chance, but no one has been left unchanged.
Now, the most obvious choice for hero is Jack, who even has the Christlike name Shephard and is, by profession, a healer. But given the complexity of the show, I expect a curve-ball or two come the apocalyptic end. But the only one who has been good, more or less from start to finish is Hurley. And theres one other key reason why I think he might be the one; hes the only one who came to the island with thew apparent understanding that getting everything you think you want in life can actually be more of a curse than a blessing.
This theme of wish-fulfillment being a curse is getting stronger throughout the final season, partcularly with Smokey/Locke dangling carrots in front of folks like getting off the island or getting all the answers they ever wanted. Hell, he might as well have a forked tongue and slither on his belly.
But so far, he hasnt tempted Hurley as I can recall, and neither has anyone else. Hes followed other people when he thinks its the right thing to do, but never out of persona self-interest.
So there it is. Ive said it. Its out there. tell me what a moron I am and why this cant possibly be whats coming. But my money, at least for now, is on Hurley.
Tire-Burning, Corporate “Citizens” and the Supreme Court
March 5th, 2010NewSpin
By Christian Piatt
(Originally printed in PULP)
Love or hate it, we have a new cement plant in Pueblo. Yes, it will bring jobs, and yes, it will add pollution to our local environment. Spin it however you want, but no one can argue in good conscience that cement manufacturing has a positive or even neutral impact on the planet.
What were left with, then, is the challenge of at least mitigating those negative effects on our community. Already, we see growing numbers of respiratory-related problems in Pueblo. So what to do?
Some local media have celebrated the proposal to burn used tires for fuel in the plant, indicating that this is an excellent example of real recycling for our state to celebrate. Apparently, the other recycling efforts currently underway in Southern Colorado dont qualify as real.
Granted, we have millions of tires that have to be disposed of every year, one way or another, and burning them for fuel does decrease the need for fossil fuels. But to tout tire burning as an alternative energy source is, at best, disingenuous.
As the Montana Environmental Information Center points out, Tires contain chlorine. When chlorine is burned, it can form dioxin. DEQ (Department of Environmental Quality) admits that the dioxin emissions pose the greatest risk to health and the environment from tire burning.
But dioxin is only one concern. The Energy Justice Network lists lots of other dangerous byproducts on tire burning:
The fumes emitted are packed with the many toxic chemicals that tires contain (including volatile organic compounds such as benzene, metals such as lead, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzo(a)pyrene, and synthetic rubber components such as butadiene and styrene). Additionally, the chlorine content in tires leads to the creation of dioxins and furans (which are extremely toxic chemicals) when tires are burned.
One argument that proponents of this energy strategy make is that, although these compounds created in the fires are highly toxic, the systems used to burn the tires can clean such chemicals from the gases emitted into the atmosphere.
Theyre right that such systems exist. The problem is that cement plants that burn tires arent required to have them.
Said environmental researcher Dr. Neil Carman: Cement kilns are not designed or required to have major fail-safe combustion devices such as large afterburners that all state-of-the-art incinerators must have by federal law today
Research for this piece yielded no federal or state standards to which polluters are held to determine if their tire-burnings are in compliance or not, and emissions from such plants generally are tested only 2 1/2 years, at most.
There is a fee that the state collects every time a new tire is sold. Approximately $1.50 of each sale goes to the state, supposedly for the purpose of subsidizing proper disposal of the tires once theyre out of commission. The problem is that this fund has regularly been raided, allocated instead for general fund expenses rather than being set aside to aid the purpose for which the tax was initially levied.
There are lots of other more Earth-friendly uses for old tires, especially once they are ground into crumb rubber. The byproduct is used for playground surfaces, running tracks and even in asphalt for roads. But these uses dont fetch the same premium that they do as fuel. Meanwhile the shell game of environmental risk factors continues, and our communitys health suffers the inevitable consequences.
On a somewhat related topic, state manufacturers are incensed about proposed legislation that would lift the tax exemption for two years theyve enjoyed on all money spent on energy to run their factories. The impact would indeed be close to home, with companies like Evraz Steel and Summit Brick realizing a significant tax increase.
The companies are fair in arguing such expenses may result in layoffs down the road. Pro-business advocates argue that the absence of such exemptions make us appear less business-friendly as a state. All of this aside, I have more of a philosophical issue with this complaint.
Personally, I get no tax break for the money I spend on electricity and gas in my home, and a big percentage of every dollar I spend on gasoline goes to the government coffers. Corporations dont want to be treated like individuals because, theoretically, they bring more economic value to the table. They deserve special treatment.
Then the federal Supreme Court ruled recently that corporations indeed should have the same First Amendment rights to free speech that individual citizens have, which means they have free rein to donate to the political campaigns of their choosing.
It seems that businesses want to be treated as individual citizens when it benefits them, but not when it comes to taxation. This double standard not only serves to erode the confidence of a public already suspect of the impartiality of government; it also makes a mockery of the Constitution upon which our system of governance is based.