Real Joe

On Aug. 10, the NY Times reported: Pope John Paul II made his prayer appeal at the papal palace in lakeside Castel Gandolfo, which is generally cooler than Rome. Drought-fed fires have plagued Italy, the Iberian Peninsula, France and arid areas of other countries. “I invite all to join in my prayers for the victims of this calamity, and I exhort all to raise to the Lord fervent entreaties so that He may grant the relief of rain to the thirsty Earth,” John Paul told pilgrims and tourists.

Today, the AP reports that “France’s worst heat wave on record has killed between 1,500 and 3,000 people, the Health Ministry said yesterday, as the government faced accusations that it failed to respond to a major health crisis. Deaths accelerated in the past week, with up to 180 people dying in one day in Paris from Europe’s sweltering summer, the ministry said.”

So will the Pope be explaining why “deaths accelerated” since he prayed on Sunday? Probably not. What about asking God to quit having the earth’s tectonic plates push together, creating earthquakes which will kill thousands in the future? Or why not ask God to change the nature of thunderstorms so that they quit producing the lightning that kills thousands each year? Dang design flaws!

Oy.

Bob from Iowa wrote to me about his recent trip. “One of the high points, no pun intended, was hiking above 13,000 feet in Rocky Mountain National Park. No trees up there – just lots of lichen covered rocks and shrubs. I was kinda proud that my 65 year old body and damaged heart held up. On the other hand, had I croaked, I can’t think of a better place to check out.”

Which reminded me of the Sitting Bull quote: “It’s a great day to die, and it’s a great day to fight for our way of life. It’s a great day to die, and it’s a great day to defend this gift of land from the Great Spirit!”

After I read that quote the first time, I began to say to my wife while relaxing on vacation with our kids at Lake Superior, “Ahhhhh, this is a perfect day. All the good things in my life are here. A great day to die.” Eventually, she asked me to knock it off since it gave her the creeps. But I still think it’s a helpful attitude to have, creepy or not.

Guess what’s “… North America’s hottest theological debate of the moment“?

Believe it or not, it’s something called “open theism” as described in this article by AP religion writer Richard N. Ostling: What did God know and when did he know it?

“Open theism … emphasizes God’s loving interactions with people and denies that the deity knows absolutely everything about the future. This denial doesn’t come from liberals but from certain evangelical Protestants.”

And the opposition counters: “God is all powerful and all knowing; and his perfect knowledge extends to all things, past, present, and future, including the future decisions of his free creatures.”

Which is why rhetorical questions like, “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?” are needed — to demonstrate the futility of out-of-touch theological debates like this one.

How the hell (or, if your prefer, “How in God’s name…”) does this debate increase the likelihood that people will pursue a spirituality that actually helps them in their daily lives?

NY Times: The Modern Pickup Truck Retires From Work and Moves Into Town

“Americans are crazy for the utilitarian look, and nothing looks more utilitarian than a pickup. But the look is what matters these days, not the utility. At the luxury end of the pickup market, you come across utter absurdity, like the now-discontinued Lincoln Blackwood, which looked as if it was pitched directly at the short-haul drug-dealer market. It was, essentially, a cigarette boat for the road, and every bit as practical… I often marvel at America’s excess utilitarian capacity, all those off-road vehicles that never go off-road, all those pickup trucks that never pick anything up.”

One of the few times that I ever remember my dad confronting me in a tone that I could hear was when I was 17 and spouting off about rich people and their Caddies and Lincolns. He said, “Your piece of shit Chevy is just as much an ego trip to you as their fancy cars are to them. So quit being holier than thou.”

He was right. And since I’m currently driving a piece-of-shit ‘89 Toyota Corrolla, his advice still yanks me out of my ego as soon as start thinking that, “… you know, it’s kind of cool driving this ugly, underpowered but dependable POS.”

The August issue of Oprah’s O magazine has an article titled, How Men Really Feel About Their Bodies. (The entire aritcle is not available online, but large chunks are.)

It’s well-written piece by a guy, Ted Spiker, who’s also a regular contributor to Men’s Health magazine.

“At six feet two and 215 pounds, I’m not huge. I just carry my weight where women do—in my hips, butt and thighs. And I hate it. I hate the way clothes fit. I hate that friends say I use the “big-butt defense” in basketball. I’m not the only man who wishes his body looked more like Michael Jordan’s and less like a vat of pudding. A recent survey showed that only 18 percent of men are happy enough with their physiques that they wouldn’t change them. While women get there first, they don’t have a monopoly on stressing over looks.”

Spiker takes risks with this piece, revealing much about his own struggles with his body image.

But it’s more than a little ironic that the article appears in Oprah’s O and not in Men’s Health. Evidently it’s still not safe for Men’s Health to run a piece that’s emotionally revealing. And Spiker says nothing about how men’s magazines like Men’s Health have contributed to the male obsession with looks with their abs-only covers and plethora of articles and promotions dedicated to it.

Of course, that would be biting the hand that feeds. And, truth be told, my essay “The Sweat, the Moonlight, and the Lace” was rejected by Men’s Health earlier this year. Had it been accepted, I’d also be reluctant to criticize them for contributing to the problem. Hmmm. Maybe I should submit my piece to O?

I blogged about the Rev. Pat Robertson’s Operation Supreme Court Freedom a couple of weeks ago. Yesterday, the NY Times had an editorial titled, Offensive Prayer Offensive.

So today I sent this piece to the Times’ OpEd department.

Yes, the Rev. Pat Robertson’s Operation Supreme Court Freedom is “pulpit tomfoolery” as stated in a recent NY Times editorial. But a closer look at the recent wartime prayers of many mainstream religious leaders — and the prayers that we followers often engage in — shows them to be virtually the same.

Prior to the start of the war with Iraq, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America’s conference of bishops suggested this prayer: “Let us pray for Saddam Hussein and the leaders of Iraq, that they will choose peace, comply with the international mandate to destroy weapons of mass destruction, and end the oppression under which their people are forced to live.”

Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles wrote at end of a letter in which he argued against the preemptive use of force in Iraq, “I would invite all people of the Archdiocese to join with me in prayer for the leaders of all nations that they may exercise their duties with great wisdom and in the pursuit of peace.”

Asking God to change the minds of certain world leaders about war is no different than Robertson’s asking God to change the minds of certain Supreme Court justices about retirement.

The parents of Samuel Patrick Cox, the sailor who was killed along with three others in a Navy helicopter crash in Italy on July 16, posted excerpts from their journals on the web when his deployment in the Middle East began. They wrote, “Please, God, keep him safe. Keep all of them safe.” And to their readers, “In the meantime, won’t you join us — the families, loved ones and friends of U.S. service people — in praying for their safe return?”

It’s a gut-wrenching story, because nearly every parent prays for the safety of their children, whether they’re walking home from school alone, driving a car on a prom date, or heading off to war.

But what exactly is it we’re asking God to do? In Iraq, the implication is that we want God to somehow direct Iraqi bombs and bullets away from our loved ones (but have ours hit theirs?), to make all our aircraft and ships and ground vehicles work flawlessly so that none of our troops die from an accident (but have theirs turn to junk?)

Asking God to intercede in the minutiae of wartime or the external events of our daily lives is no different than asking God to intercede in the minutiae of judicial retirement.

My wife chides me, “If our sons were in the service in Iraq, I’d sure be praying for their safety. It’s a natural urge, a comforting thing to do. You’re being so judgmental.”

I know it’s comforting, but it’s mistaken — and ultimately undermines the power of true prayer. The more we see God as a master controller over external events, a wizard behind the curtain who flips switches at times in response to our pleas, the more we’re likely to miss the benefits of a truer prayer, as exemplified by the Serenity Prayer, or the “Make me an instrument of peace” prayer of St. Francis of Assisi. Those prayers focus on our internal state of mind and our own behavior. They work no matter whether you see God as a being, a higher power, or a universal force of intelligence that pervades the universe. They’re the kind of prayers Jesus could only have meant when he said, “Ask and ye shall receive.”

This week’s issue of Time has a cover story on meditation titled, Just Say Om: Scientists study it. Doctors recommend it. Millions of Americans–many of whom don’t even own crystals–practice it every day. Why? Because meditation works.

It’s written by Joel Stein in classic Stein style: “The one thought I cannot purge, the one that keeps coming back and getting between me and my bliss, is this: What a waste of time. I am sitting cross-legged on a purple cushion with my eyes closed in a yoga studio with 40 people, most of them attractive women in workout outfits…”