The Playground

The following is a comment on my friend Jonathan's Blog.

This person is criticizing Jonathan for declaring his newfound position in life, a position free of guilt, manipulation, narcissistic controllers, and so much more. He is in a good, blessed stage in his life; yet, instead of celebrating with him, there are people - such as the following anonymous commenter - who would criticize how he revels under his unaccustomed light load.

Anonymous
"I know this will not be popular with the “freedom takers”…..
But if you are truly free………then live free! Stop looking back and go on with your new lives. A truly free man does not have to sit back and keep recounting the things he believes he was in captive of.
Freedom does not have to rally others to justify what he has done.
Freedom simply walks on, head held high and goes forth.
You aren’t truly free if you keep wearing the chains.
Talking about the wrong that has been done to you isn’t going to change it.
Pointing out the mistakes of others will not make it better or go away.
You keep your own self captive by remaining in that same mental state.
Move on.
It should be of no consequence of the “freedom takers” what goes on in their “former land”. It is no longer their land. You don’t have to ponder it, you don’t have to live it, and you don’t even have to acknowledge it.
You are not going to change it.
Leave it in the hands of God
Because, that truly is where it belongs. He is the author and finisher.
What should be of consequence to the “freedom takers” now is their new life.
Doing what is right, putting on their new life, enjoying your blessings, don’t taint it all by not living this:

A healthy life demands the healthy practice of forgiveness. True forgiveness has a deeply profound effect upon the forgiver. The forgiver goes from an atmosphere of discontent and resentment to one of peace and joy. Such a transition cannot be underestimated as to its value.

That is how you become true “Freedom Takers”

May 1, 2007 1:36 PM"

This commenter's purpose was simply to shut Jonathan's mouth. Right now, Jonathan is saying, "Thank you, Lord, for leading me where I am. Thank you for the blessings. Thank you for the comfort of freedom that I didn't have in my old home." The commenter is effectively saying in response, "Shut up, sit down, and quit talking about it already," to stifle him from praising and thanking God for the change in his life, the moving from lameness to walking, blindness to sight.

Anyone can see that the commenter's post is littered with assumptions and presumptions. This person is assuming and expecting that all of Jonathan's conversations and thoughts are spent dwelling on the old life. This person is presuming that his old life and all that was in it was interesting enough to warrant all of his reflection and energy and blog space now. That's a lot of guessing to do about someone else's life.

I can remember the men that Jesus healed of leprosy. He healed 10 men, and only one returned to thank him. What does that mean? One man was willing to travel backward over the diseased ground he had just walked. He was willing to look backward and remember, "I was as good as dead until this man came and healed me. Look at me now!" He had to reconcile where he came from with where he ended up in order to validate his healing. For the men who didn't return to thank Jesus, I think they forgot from what they had been delivered. It's as if their healing or saving had never happened. It became obsolete the minute they stopped remembering their past.

The problem with highly emotional and reactionary comments like this one is that there are partial truths spread thin throughout that create an overall sense of authenticity. There is a lot of "should be" and "you don't have to" language that suggests this commenter knows what's good or right for Jonathan's life - or anyone else's who presents as free. I find that contradictory because, this commenter wasn't brave (or convinced of the argument) enough to supply his or her name, yet he or she expects that Jonathan "should" find credibility in what was said. I don't know about Jonathan, but I find no credibilty.

There is also an excess of imperative language (commanding or directing) suggesting this person feels he or she is uniquely situated to give orders. Why? I'd like for the commenter to please explain how he or she is so qualified to sit around pontificating about what is freedom and how someone should or shouldn't behave when living in it. I can read between the lines and it seems to me, this person is delusional about his or her own state of freedom. Often people can describe something only in terms of what it's not or what it should be, and I think that's the case here. This person is talking about what freedom should be because it's what that person wants in his or her own life and refuses to walk away from what is encumbering.

Related is something that my dad reminded me of yesterday: Those who ignore history are bound to repeat it. That is why I disagree with this anonymous comment. It tells me and anyone else reading that freedom only comes in forgetting - forgetting what led to the need of freedom in the first place, that is, whatever it was that caused the entrapment - and in silencing the voice that would remind and remember and be wary and cautious of being duped once again.

That is why I don't forget. That is why I talk about the so-called "old land" as it occurs in conversation and remember the good and the bad and thank God for where I am today. Because I don't ever want to forget where He led me from yesterday.

Walking up the street to the top rated pizza parlor in Pittsburgh.

Why?

Because we can.

Basement playroom with bathroom.

"Note, also, It is a heinous evil, and severely to be censured, for Christians to treat their fellow-christians with contempt and insolence, but especially at the Lord's table."

This is part of his commentary on 1 Corinthians 11:17-22. We'd all do well to remember it.

There is simply no proper or honorable way to leave. Period. To leave is to fail, to die, to be defeated by evil. To leave is to invite divine retribution.

A corollary to the "No Exit" rule is the demonization of those who leave:

They are angry or in a season of anger.
They are evil, weak, selfish, and foolish.
They are lost.
They are wandering in darkness, unable to see.
They are deserters throwing away what God has given them.
They are Enemies of the Cross.
They have chosen Evil over Goodness.
They are the mouthpiece of the Enemy attacking the righteous.
They are listening to the Enemy accuse the brethren.
They are only 30-fold and don't know any better.
They weren't really trying.
They didn't follow the procedures correctly.
They were unable to resist the temptation to sin.
They hid and didn't follow council.
They couldn't sever their unholy alliances and have been misled.
They couldn't be honest.
They could never fully fellowship with the brethren.
We are much better off without their bad influences.
They changed.

Most of the above is Copyright © 2007, A. Orange.
I will supply the link if asked.

The internet world is a great place. So much information, so many perspectives, so many groups of people connecting around the globe. Ideas and opinions flow freely and reach the masses. And it's fast. We don't have to wait for the daily news anymore. We have immediate and constant access to breaking news over seas and around the world.

Here's the thing I think we often forget. It's a world of dots and pixels, zeros and ones. Behind the scenes, at its core it's robotic, sterile, and cold. The machines whir and buzz and cursors blink dumbly as they await input.

Through myspace, blogger, instant messager, flickr, singles' communities, podcasts, etc. we try and infuse human aspects and affections into these boxes of modems and wires. We no longer are only members of our tangible environments, we're members of virtual "online communities." We don't just have friends anymore; we have friends and online friends, and in my experience, they rarely cross borders.

Try it sometime. Try conveying a passionate or tearful or tender message through email or instant messager to a friend you've only known in the real world. I would bet things won't turn out as expected. Why? You say to yourself, this person knows me, they understand what I'm all about, they should know what I mean. What we forget is that something like 90% (I believe I'm remembering that correctly) of our communication is not in our words. The people we know intimately have an understanding of our tones of voice, facial expressions, broader body language and so all the communication is seasoned with these various bits that all get stripped and reduced to mere words when we interact through machines.

It's a cankerous petridish of misunderstanding, hurt feelings, perceived offenses, and bad grammar.

The contrary is true of our online relationships. I have found it overwhelming and over-stimulating to engage with someone in person after interacting with them only remotely. It's an overload to contend with all their quirks and mannerisms that were blissfully absent in the chat room - or wherever. The realms of text and smiley's and frownies can be a welcome simplicity to the barrage of inputs from real world connections. The two are interesting foils.

So, well, what to do with this? I don't know really. I just find it helpful to remember that all the flash, avatars, and "pimp your myspace" designs are smoke and mirrors, pretty packaging for a coded domain of zeros and ones.

I left a comment on my post "Matthew Henry was a Smart Guy" regarding anonymous comments. I'd just like to reiterate my position here. I'm happy to post most comments because I appreciate all points of view about what I write. However, I do not post comments that come in anonymously. You're free to agree or disagree with what I write, but please, just have the courtesy to let me know who you are. After all, you know who I am. Just give me a name, but try not to be coy and clever; don't make up a name. Be convicted enough in the message you leave to sign your name to it. Thank you and please keep commenting.

As my children are getting a little older I'm facing the quota of the precious few moments during childhood when parents get to choke on their, "Praise Jesus it's not my kids!" in the RUMBLE OF screaming, whining, kicking, fighting, nose-picking, dirt-eating, head-spinning-tantrum-throwing, INSANITY that is every place where there are kids.

God have mercy on the mother and daughter I encountered in Chick-fil-A today. (We were playing in the indoor tubes/slides thingy, which, fortunately is sound-proof to the dining area.) Mom said, "We're going to get ready to leave soon. Go ahead down the slide again, then we'll go." Daughter turned Emily Rose and I thought the Dark Lord himself gobbled up that little girl and was headed to mom next. Horns popped right out her forehead; she grew a barbed black tail through her lavender sun dress, and her forked tongue hissed and spit and sought to devour.

I don't know whether the mother was previously aware that her child was Satan's spawn or if she was simply as horrified as the rest of the room; but she just stood there with limp arms and vacant Stepford Wives party face while the nine cirlces of hell invaded toddler land. One mother fished around in her purse for the rosary while another one lashed together some umbrellas to fashion a cross. My only thought was for my kids. I didn't want their cutthroat instincts to kick in on account of this prosaic performance and inspire them to school the wee thespian on how the masters do it.

So we high-tailed it and left the rest to the exorcism.

In related news, another sporadic parental power is wish-granting, so if ever you have opportunity to grant a kid's wish, JFDI no matter the size. Yesterday Evelina wished on the airborne dandelion seeds she blew to freedom (and multiplication.) She sat in the weeds clutching her dandelion and whispered her wish into her other hand. She said it was a secret because wishes don't come true if you tell them. (As though I don't know such things.)

Later in the car she was beside herself in anticipation of her wish coming true. She gave me a clue about it. (I guess that's not against wish-coming-true policy.) "It has to do something about numbers, Mama." I guessed that she was excited about her birthday when she'll be six (because Colin is six), which isn't for another year, but you know how it is when you're five.

"No. I mean it's about numbers, MOM."

"I can't possibly guess, Evelina. You've stumped me."

"Fine. I wished I could COUNT TO 400!"

Betcha can't guess what we did on the hour-long drive home from Grandma's house.

She thinks I'm magic because I made her wish come true. And that rocks!

no longer rocks my world. Melinda should have won. No contest. The voters are idiots. I'm crushed.

I drove through my old neighborhood about a week ago and it was somewhat weird, but I'm shocked and happy to report that the play ground had several new toys. Everything was freshly painted; the grass was mowed to an appropriate height for toddlers; every A-frame seemed to stand a little taller under the adornment of swings. There was a grouping of FOUR new baby swings (we were lucky to have one broken baby swing for the last five years). I think I spotted a new (or at least a repaired) picnic table under the trees so that adults had somewhere to sit. If I remember correctly, there was even a port-a-potty near the entrance (although I was so excited by all the improvements, I could have imagined it.)

Modesty dictates that I just smile and say, "How nice!" continuing on my pleased and merry way satisfied that action was taken to remedy the many complaints I detailed in the letter to the borough.

However, this is HUGE! (And I'm not all that modest.) I would just like everyone to know that Kennedy Playground in Vandergrift is less of a crap pile because of me! You're welcome. No applause necessary; erecting a port-a-potty in my honor is sufficient thanks.

I came across this in all my recent studies and research. It's an excellent sermon by Martin Luther.

Please read it. It'll be good for you.

Sometimes I'm embarrassed to say I'm a Christian. I love the Lord and I strive to walk in righteousness. I seek truth and endevour to accomplish my day in love. I believe Christ is the son of God sent as the propitiation for the sins of the world. Still, there are times I am embarrassed by the label Christian - not because I'm not thoroughly convinced of my beliefs or because I fear persecution by unbelievers. Non-Christians are not the foil or threat to Christianity. Christians are.

Christianity is about love, forgiveness, salvation from sin and the resulting peace; and it's about spreading that good news. Many professing Christians forget that, I think. I say professing and not actual because often their actions tell a different story than their lips. Confessing my faith as a Christian is to be named among these hearers and not doers of the Word. This is not judgement or condemnation on my part, merely a presenting of accumulated experience. The Bible says, "By their fruits, ye shall know them." (Matthew 7) If the world knows Christians (in general) as exclusionary, Bible-bashing, opinionated, loud-mouths, our fruits have spoken for us and we have nullified our witness.

There's an unfortunate and cloistered environment that some Christian churches have fostered which basically makes a competition out of the religion. It's all about acquiring greater attendance than the church down the street. Or purposefully scheduling evangelistic events in direct conflict with other churches' similar ministries. Or using such ostracizing language as, "Those other places don't have what we have here," and "People only go to those other places to hide in the crowd."

Maybe people go to "those other places" because they offer interesting ministries? Maybe the "other places" are closer to home? Perhaps God even leads people where He wants them to be?

Churches that embrace such a narrow-minded attitude impede the people from choosing anything different. The only way to worship God is the way that church worships; the only place to serve God is within those walls; the only way to be holy is to be there. To think individually, to move on, to propose change is to be lost and to reject the truth.

As preposterous as it sounds coming from the loving, long-suffering nature of Christianity, groups like this exist and they are what propagate the marginalizing reputation of Christians everywhere.

I believe this chasm within Christianity is what hinders the saving of souls. We invalidate our testimonies to potential Christians by polarizing our message and mistreating those not "on our side."

I read something recently in which the author mentioned that Jesus had to correct his disciples telling them that the Gospel is not copyrighted. (It was in reference to Mark 9:38-39 when John told Jesus that he and his brother forbade a man from casting out demons in Jesus' name because he was not one of the twelve. Jesus told them to not forbid him because "he that is not against us is for our part.") So why the skirmishing over sides and the bigotted attitudes of, "No other church is as good as ours"? Do we not all convene under the blood of Jesus Christ? And ultimately, as Christians, don't we all have the same Great Commission? "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," Matt. 28:19.