Aliens: Covenant: A theological reflection based on way too little...

Having only seen the trailers, there was an interesting piece that caught my attention.  It may be in the movie, or it may be edited so as to have nothing to do with the movie.  So, there are no spoilers here, only prophecy, for good or for ill.

The one line was about finding a planet that was habitable and 'all ready' for humanity.  If I am right, I believe that is the lure for the humans who eventually start the dance with one of my favorite scifi monster franchises.

What I like in the title is the word 'covenant'.  That speaks to my pastoral nature because it is such a bible word.  I use it to talk about the promises that a married couple are making to one another.  But it is reflective of another relationship, that of God to humanity.  That is a theme across the bible.  In the Old Testament (or Covenant!!), it is with the Hebrews.  In the New...Covenant (or Testament), that is broadened under Jesus.

What business has Aliens with that term?  I think (prophecy, NOT spoiler) it has something to do with this tempting planet.  Someone or something is trying to play nice with the humans so that they have breeding pods for the Alien eggs.  I wonder if it is the same someone or something that pulled together predators and humans on that 'battle world' episode?  If that has already been explained in the mythology, I beg your pardon.

Frankly, there are so many franchises and so little time.

So it is not so much a God-given covenant as a semi-divine set up, wrapped in the cloak of a covenant.  Or is it the covenant of a God who is viewed as nasty, depraved, and disconnected from humanity?  That will require a trip into the theological psychology of Ridley Scott, too much for this post.

I may have the whole premise of the movie wrong because I am overthinking the trailer.  But it has already been established that a "god" presence was set up for the Aliens so that humans would become willing, worshipful breeder eggs in A vs. P (if memory serves).

It will be interesting to see what is behind the aliens.  Something chains up the mother beasts to make the eggs.  Something builds a pyramid so that they are cannon fodder for Predators (seems to be a little too much for the predators to do themselves).  Something created the perfect planet as a lure for humanity.

Or I really stink as a prophet.

Free Speech in America

Free Speech is a hallmark of the American Way.  We can speak our minds, express ourselves openly and freely, lay it all on the line.

So when Richard Spenser, speaking at a rally, says "Heil Trump! Heil our people! Heil victory! To be white is to be a striver, a crusader, an explorer and a conqueror..."  he is expressing his freedom of speech.  When members of the audience hold out their arms in the Nazi salute, they are expressing their freedom of expression.

Our President-elect also expresses his freedom of speech, his freedom to protest what he considers to be worthy of his attention.

Twitter, 11/20/16:
"The cast and producers of Hamilton, which I hear is highly overrated, should immediately apologize to Mike Pence for their terrible behavior."

And also from 11/20: "I watched parts of @nbcsnl Saturday Night Live last night. It is a totally one-sided, biased show - nothing funny at all. Equal time for us?"

Okay, SNL and Hamilton...but nothing thus far about those individuals who would compare him in a positive way with Adolf Hitler.

Just an observation.

He's Going To Be President...I Thought She Was...

I truly thought we were going to be celebrating the First Woman to be President of the United States.  So did the pollsters, the news commentators, the pundits, the markets, the Free world, the Nearly Free world, need I go on... 

Why did people vote the way they did?  After all the negativity and dangerous rhetoric that has come out of the mouth of Donald Trump, why did people vote for him?  His attitudes about women, advocating sexual violence for personal satisfaction, who says that in the 21st century?  Who says that in ANY century in this country?  As I read back, my last post was all about his trip to Mexico, so I do not need to repeat that. 

And then, in the last forty eight hours, it has all gone away, forgotten, parked on the back burner.  Hillary Clinton called him to concede.  She did not take up his own words and rally the masses to protest.  President Obama has too backed off all the charges he has made about how unfit this man is to rule and promised a smooth transition.  Mr. Trump himself has made the conciliatory speech of 'uniting the people'.  How does Washington change gears so completely?

And what is up with that FBI email stuff and nonsense?  Bring it out, take it back, bring it out, take it back...  Before I swore off the news, I looked, with pain, at the election maps.  I think the margin of victory was too large to blame that as the tipping event.

So then, what was the tipping event?  What was it, what is it in Donald Trump that brought so many people out to vote?  Can we blame voter turnout?  A hundred more million people were eligible to vote than actually did. 

I would like to believe the following: "What is wrong with the country that they voted in Donald Trump?"  But at the end of this time of reflection and anger and deflation, the question I have left is "What is wrong with me that I am so troubled by the election of Donald Trump?"

I firmly believe that by his words and his actions and his lifestyle that Donald Trump is unfit to govern this nation.  To hold what he has said and what he has done up to the measure of the my Christian morality and faith, I find him wanting.  I am not saying that forgiveness is denied him, but I have seen NO movement to ask for the forgiveness bought for us by the shedding of Jesus' blood.  I have seen no movement to even acknowledge that he has done or said things that are wrong.

Yet, he spoke to people and overcame the offensiveness of his campaign in their lives and attitudes because of something more.  He promised to return manufacturing jobs that have disappeared due to automation.  He promised to return coal mining jobs that have disappeared due to cleaner, safer ways to provide energy.  He has made free trade and Mexico the scape goats for all that is wrong in the economics of this nation.

What need did I fail to take into consideration in this country that I am so troubled by his election?  The piece that pokes at my gut is the piece of his being a political 'outsider'.  His comments and his attitude, his preference to go off the cuff instead of off the prompter, his willingness to say everything and anything that no one else was willing to say, his willingness to promise the moon, what chord of abandonment and disenfranchisement did he touch in these United States?

He tapped into a source of anger and pain that he claims he can heal.  I do not believe that he can truly provide healing, but there is a desperation that people were willing to take him at the word they wanted to hear, filtering out EVERYTHING else. 

What is wrong with me that I am so troubled by the election of Donald Trump?  I missed the pain and the desperation that my fellow Americans would turn so far outside of common decency to seek relief.  Grab a woman by... C'MON!!!

Not since the Civil Rights Movement and the protests against the war in Vietnam have the President-Elect and the country as a whole been in so desperate need of prayer.  Because right now, I do not know what else to do.

Nominee Trump is Going to Mexico...

An NPR commentator asked about what the Mexican President should do concerning his upcoming meeting with Republican Presidential Nominee Donald Trump, especially in the face of comments that the Republican Presidential Nominee has made concerning Mexico, Mexicans, and "The Wall".

Who remembers when "the Wall" was the symbol of the Iron Curtain when it stretched across Berlin?

What can President Pena Nieto really say to Nominee Trump?  In a world where all was fair and equal, the President of Mexico could call him out for his comments, could yell at him, could hold his feet to the fire in the court of public opinion.  But can he really?  

The Mexican Press might be screaming about this, but there is no way to know with patterns of reporting in this country.  

The reality of the situation is that there is a mathematically significant chance that Nominee Trump might become President Trump let us bow our heads in prayer... and Mexico will have to get in line with the rest of us to 'live' under such a regime.  There is only so much room in Canada...

Historically, there are four reasons why President Pena Nieto must be politically correct with Nominee Trump, at least on a superficial level.  Those reasons are Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and California.  Please forgive the limits of my historic memory if there is more Mexican territory that we, these free United States, seized from our neighbors to the south.

Politically, the world is divided into two hundred countries according to my World Maps Game App and we like to pretend that they are two hundred equal partners in the running of Mother Earth. 

Sure.

The United States is the preeminent power in the Western Hemisphere.  It the world, China, what was the Soviet Union...well, that is about all I can think of...in the world, that might form a balance of power with us.  But over here?  Canada?  Mexico?  Brazil?  Argentina? 

Historically, Mexico is wise to fear the United States and her expansionist policies.  Economically, for all the crying that goes on in the US press about jobs 'heading south', is there any measure of parity between these two neighbors?  Militarily, what would it take for the US to decide that, for its own good, it should intervene in the Drug War going on 'down there'?

I do not believe that any of these scenarios is likely, but I am also not the President of Mexico or the United States.  But we do not live in a world where every nation is equal to every other one.  Nor do we live in a nation that has a spotless record as preservers of rights and freedoms for the world.  And the rhetoric coming from the Republican Nominee is...intense...to say the least. 

Racist?  Classist?  Hateful?

I do not know that President Pena Nieto is going to say to Presidential Nominee Donald Trump.  I can guess-probably with some accuracy-what he would like to say, and that is for more reasons than because I follow a religion that believes in prophecy. 

But he cannot.  Because he has the 'joy' of considering that the Nominee for President may actually become the President that he has to deal with.  And that sends shivers down my spine.

Slaughter of the Innocents Versus the Law of God...

The last two posts, one leading into this week's sermon, the other lamenting the contrast of the multiple lives lost in the nightclub attack in Orlando versus the tragic loss of a boy to an alligator in Disney, illustrate a sad point.  My lamentation was that we would too soon forget.  And I am the proof of the matter.  What a unique ability we have to compartmentalize our feelings and our focal points.

Do these points of life really intersect?  Actually, they do in a very vicious way.  The slaughter at "the Pulse" came under the point of view that the law is still our judge, jury, and, when necessary, our executioner.  If this view of the massacre is not the proof of how wrong it is to take the law as our means of judgement today, as our means of daring to stand in God's shoes, as our means of the most extreme arrogance that a human might hope to achieve, then I do not know what is.

Yes, it was the presumption of Muslim law that the killer used to justify his killings, but there have been enough active and passive nods of approval from Christendom to make this our issue as well. 

One of the points often made in the debate about the salvation of the LGBTQ community is that Jesus never talks about them.  The condemnation comes from other places, like from Paul the misogynist or from the antiquated and backward reaches of the Old Testament.  The point being made is that since Jesus does not see fit to mention the issue of 'those' people, then it is not an issue.  In other words, if Jesus does not condemn the LGBTQ community, then condemnation is not to be considered.

That is fair, as far as it goes.  But Jesus did things broadly with the law that make this argument very difficult to sustain.  He made the law harder.  He included motives and thoughts in the stable of guilt-making offenses, not simply the activities.  His point of view was that the law was impossible for anyone to follow, that everyone was condemned under it, not just the LGBTQ community but also the Christian community who accuses them of being so particularly evil.

Because Jesus was getting at something.  He never said, "the law is the way, the truth, and the life, nobody comes to the Father except by the law."  Going by the law, NOBODY gets to the Father at all!  He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life."  All that condemnatory stuff died with him on the cross.

What the law has become is a means of instruction in the life of faith.  It is a presentation of the love of God and the love of neighbor.  And all the Christians who take the law, point the finger, and claim the authority to condemn somebody else, anybody else, they have missed the point most completely.

Because every single person Jesus comes across, every person he would point the finger at, every one he would call out, he would call them out and declare "You are beloved by God."

The Law...What Shall Be Done With the Law of God?

This Sunday, I am preaching about the Ten Commandments.  It is the second in a cycle of sermons this summer offering an overview of the bible, from one pastor's perspective.  The tough part is in the consideration of what the Law still has to offer in light of Jesus Christ.  I grew up in a Calvinist tradition where the Law pre-Jesus condemned us for our inability to obey it, but post-Jesus, teaches us how we ought to be reshaping our lives in the presence of Christ.

I got really excited about a bible-nerd discovery connecting the Ten Commandments to Jesus' summary of the law, loving God and loving neighbor. 

But it is truly challenging to apply my conclusions to the popular judgments that are so much part of Christendom.  This is not simply another rant about how so much of Christendom condemns the LGBTQ Community, not simply that, but it is more broadly focused.  When judgment is passed about something, what is the Church doing with the law?

I should define terms here, a little bit.  Christendom is the sum total of the Christian cultural and societal presence in the world, at least it is to me.  Liberals, Conservatives, Fundamentalists, Christo-communists, you name it.  Some are great, in my opinion, some are wacky, in my opinion, some are dangerous, in my opinion.  We are all gathered together under one roof.

The Church is a more organized part of Christendom.  For me, it is the assembled voices of pastors and church leadership.  Kind of what shows up in the news, I suppose.  It is drawn from Christendom, but is not exhaustive of Christendom. 

If the Law of God has changed roles, as I argue, from the condemnatory tool to the formation tool that I believe it is, then we have a new world order to bring into being.  Speaking in the name of God to condemn is an awesome responsibility to undertake.  And I am really no longer sure that is what the Church is called to do. 

The responses are already forming in my head, 'if not us, than whom?'  Is everything then acceptable?  What are you, crazy?  But Jesus died that I might live.  He did not die that I might condemn someone else to death.  There are some big questions to shape here.  I hope you will walk with me to seek to shape them.

Tragedy Versus Tragedy

There was a very odd contrast going on for a number of days last week.  First, 49 people were killed at the "Pulse" nightclub.  Then a young boy was killed by an alligator in Disney World.  It was a double whammy of pain and grief for Orlando.  Watching the coverage and listening to the commentators and conversations going on around the pair of events, I felt an undercurrent.

Anyone read "Mad Magazine" growing up?  Anyone a fan of "Spy vs. Spy", the character in white versus the character in black blowing one another up?  I had a sense of that in the aftermath of Orlando. 

Maybe I am being overly sensitive to the whole matter, but there seemed to be a sense out there that the life of one boy killed in Disney was on par with 49 killed in the nightclub.  Maybe it was an attempt to move the hate crimes of killing homosexuals off the front burner with something-anything else.  The tragic circumstances of the death of a toddler in one of the most famous places on earth, could that have been a coincidence to be exploited to take eyes off the issue of tragedy and homosexuality?

I type that out, repeat the phrase out loud to myself, and I feel like a conspiracy theorist.  This seems beyond consideration.  Tragedy is tragedy.  The nightclub massacre and the death of the toddler are both going to result in grief and emotional destruction for their families.  49 versus 1?  Do we even make such numeric comparisons in the measure of tragedy?  Can it be?

I do not know.  But in the aftermath of the "Pulse" massacre, hearing stories of clergy who refused to carry out funerals for the fallen, hearing stories of certain types of Christians who will go so far as to protest at those funerals, hearing-if not outright approval-certainly approbation that the justice of God has been carried out by the hands of an insane shooter. 

But, as always, time moves forward and news slips into the past.  The stories will come off the front page, off the lead for the nightly news, fading from memory and consideration.  What shall we learn?  What shall we consider?  What shall we do to prevent this from happening again?

When we pose those questions, will people think more quickly of Disney?  Or of the "Pulse"?