Canceled

Canceled

Let’s talk about Helen Keller.

You’ve probably heard of her. As a child, a fever left her both blind and deaf and yet she went on to become famous for being an author and activist for those with disabilities. I imagine you, like me, have heard her story and have stood amazed at how this brave soul overcame her obstacles.

When I learned that she was an author banned by the Nazis, it made sense to me–my research had included the sad fact that children born with disabilities were being forcibly euthanized by the late 1930s in Germany, and to my mind, it would make sense that they’d want to get rid of evidence like this woman who had overcome her disabilities and inspired others to do the same.

Turns out, I was missing a step. They didn’t start by banning all books by Helen Keller (though they did by the end–the final Nazi ban list is of authors, not titles). Nope. They started by banning one. It was called How I Became a Socialist.

I’ll admit it. I didn’t realize Helen Keller was a socialist. And when I saw this a couple weeks ago, do you know what my first reaction was? My heart sank. I drew back. And I thought, Okay, maybe she’s not the best example to start my series on books-banned-by-Nazi-Germany leading up to the release of The Collector of Burned Books. I’ll keep looking.

But then, over the next few days, my own reaction kept haunting me.

Why was I willing to dismiss someone’s story just because I don’t agree with her politics? Especially when the socialism she subscribed to hadn’t even been experimented with yet? She believed in an idea. Other people (myself included) disagree with that idea. But either way, she is still a remarkable person who did remarkable things and made a HUGE difference in this world. And even if she subscribed to it knowing what I deem its failings…the same questions stand.

Does one opinion, stance, or belief define a whole person? Is it reason to condemn a person? To stop listening to them entirely? To cancel them? To ban them?

Years ago, when what we’ve come to call “cancel culture” really began to gain ground, I spoke out against it. At the time, some of “my” books and understandings were being challenged or condemned or removed. Suddenly Gone with the Wind was on the “out” list, as was To Kill a Mockingbird, and of course, Huckleberry Finn. And I cried out, “NO! We have to keep reading these books! Even when we don’t think like they do anymore, we HAVE to keep reading these books! They teach us so much about our history and the viewpoints they had and why they had them and why we DON’T anymore!”

At St. John’s College, where I went to school, we read the foundational texts of western society. Something many students find odd at first is that in our science classes, we read people whose theories have been completely disproven. We read people who are WRONG. Even as 21st century students who KNOW they are wrong. We know the entire universe does not revolve around the earth. We know, for that matter, that the heavens are not a physical dome that surrounds the earth, on which stars move around just for us. We know that our blood does not sneak from one chamber of the heart to another through pores.

So why do we read those “wrong” texts?

Because without knowing where we came from, we cannot understand where we are.

Read that sentence again.

I cannot appreciate and deeply understand the “correct” facts if I don’t know how we got here. What it’s built on. What we used to believe. And this is important in science, because we’re always learning more. How can we reason our way through new, conflicting theories if we don’t understand the foundation? And that’s what my school focuses on: equipping its students to reason through any argument about any topic. Science, math, literature, philosophy, religion, music…anything.

So “cancel culture” disturbs me at the deepest level. It’s fine not to like a book or idea. It’s great to reason through why and identify where we, and where society, has shifted and changed. To discuss whether those changes are good or bad. This is healthy. This is necessary.

But then tides shift, and those doing the cancelling begin to lose control. What, then, is our response?

All too often throughout human history, our answer is to cancel them right back. “You try to take away my books? Well, take this! I’ll take away yours.” We react exactly like I reacted to Helen Keller. We draw back from the people whose viewpoints don’t exactly align with our own, and we begin to cancel them because of one belief or stance or viewpoint.

Now, there is a lot of nuance to this topic. We cannot read everything. We cannot teach everything. We have to make decisions. And where decisions are made for groups of people, there will be HEATED disagreement. Someone’s going to go away angry, hurt, and feeling victimized. And when it involves our kids? Hoo, boy! Watch out! We’ll be debating this till the end of time, I guarantee it!

So let’s keep it to us. Adults. Christians, even.

What is the godly, Christian response to ideas we don’t agree with? To people who oppose our beliefs? To books that stir up trouble or even hate? Is it to lash out? Strike down? Remove all evidence? Cancel back those who try to cancel us?

I feel like we’re in Ancient Egypt right now, where new pharaohs physically eliminate the evidence of those who came before them. They send out craftsmen with chisels to wipe the very name of their predecessor from any monument.

But then we look at our own Bible. There, for all to see, the writers, inspired by God, memorialize the most heinous of human actions–even actions performed by their own patriarchs. They tell us about incest, rape, and murder. They tell us about prostitutes and adulterers and pagan worshipers. Some stories pass judgment (think of all the times we read “this king acted wickedly in the sight of God”) and other don’t (we never get any indicator of “good” or “bad” in the story of Jacob with his two wives and two concubines). But what we do see are consequences. Consequences of Abraham taking Hagar. Consequences of Jacob having twelve children by four women, all in competition with each other. Consequences of the king given wisdom and riches falling away from God when he takes wives who lead him astray. God still works through and on and in and with them. Thanks be to God!

Hearing and reading those stories is still necessary. Because we have to understand ourselves. Our evil motives as well as our pure. We cannot forget the bad just because it shames us. We cannot remove ideas because we don’t agree with them.

Now, we do have to decide what we promote. What we condone. And again, we’re never all going to agree on that. But even when we teach this thing…we still have to preserve that “other” thing, especially when there are still people who believe it. Especially at certain levels–higher levels. Colleges, universities. Governments. These places, above all, need to preserve. To collect. To explore. To invite reflection. To teach respectful dialogue.

Because when we remove a book…it’s usually not long before we remove the author. When we cancel an idea…it’s usually not long before we cancel the people who hold that idea.

I’m guilty of it. Are you? Is this how God wants us to view each other? His children?

I promise you here and now: we will disagree about something, you and I. Maybe it’s a fine point of faith. Maybe it’s a political view. Maybe it’s got something to do with science or medicine. Maybe it has to do with marriage and divorce. Or abortion. Or whether purple is really the most beautiful color in the world (I mean, duh. 😉 ). Some of our disagreements we’ll laugh over (like colors). Some we’ll be distressed by. All, we can learn from each other about. We can have conversations that aren’t about winning, but about learning.

So I promise you one more thing: I will never cancel you. Even if we agree on nothing, I will not cancel you. I may have to pause, to regroup, like I did with Helen Keller. I may have to pray about my own heart and biases. I may decide that I’ll refrain from certain actions that don’t align with my conscience, even if yours insists it’s great or even necessary. I may even have to step away if “conversation” devolves into “shouting match” and one side or the other is concerned with winning rather than learning. But if so, I’ll do it with respect, and I’ll do it with the hope and prayer that we’ll have another conversation later. Because you are the beloved of the Father. And if Jesus called both a Zealot and a tax collector to His table, I darsay there are both Republicans and Democrats, Conservatives and Liberals, Gay and Straight, Pro-Life and Pro-Choice people there too.

He invites us all. But here’s the thing friends–once there, He calls us all to look at our own hearts. To confess our sins and change the actions that are sinful and displeasing to Him. To love each other, to put aside our differences. To let go of OUR understanding in favor of HIS understanding. We ALL have opinions we need to set down at the foot of the cross. And it takes a lifetime. Probably more, honestly. I imagine we won’t any of us have perfect understanding until we stand before our perfect God and He reveals all to us.

So for now? Let’s default to love, and to looking at our own hearts FIRST. Let’s default not to canceling, but to considering. And let’s never, never make the mistake of dismissing a person because of an idea.

Word of the Week – Moon

Word of the Week – Moon

We talk a lot at Word of the Week about words that are shockingly new or have interesting roots. Well, moon is neither of those things. 😉 But it’s still a fascinating word to study, because of its ancient, ANCIENT history.

It’s no great surprise that the biggest constant in our night sky received a name on day one. Okay, day four, if we’re going by the Genesis narrative. 😉 Which means that the oldest languages we have record of and which led to the languages we know today, which etymologists refer to as the “proto-Indo-European” language or PIE, have the very root word from which moon is derived: me(n)ses. Not all variations preserve that n in the middle, but some do. And historically, the word for the heavenly body and the word for the cycle of that heavenly body, have been interchangeable (moon has meant “month” even in English forever, as an example). Which is where we get:

Mona – Old English and Old Frisian
Mone – Middle English
Moon – Modern English
Mano – Old Saxon and Old High German
Mani – Old Norse
Maane – Danish
Maan – Dutch
Mond – German
Masah – Sanskrit
Mah – Persian
Mis – Armenian
Mene – Greek
Mensis – Latin
Meseci – Old Church Slavonic
Menesis – Lithuanian
Mi – Old Irish
Mis – Welsh
Miz – Breton

By the 1500s, the moon was used metaphorically to refer to anything out of reach. It wasn’t until 1665 that moon was used to refer to the satellite of any planet.

As for the verb that is, ahem, usually used in reference to pulling one’s clothing down, that particular prank, let’s call it, didn’t earn the name moon until the 1960s–it’s probably from a sense of moon being slang for the buttocks from the 1760s but is likely also influenced by a sense dating to the early 1600s meaning “to expose to the moonlight.” The verb sense of “idle about or gaze moodily” is from the 1830s.

So what about Luna? In Latin, Luna was the goddess of the moon, and the word came to mean “the moon” as well, as a differentiation from mensis, which also meant month. Both words could refer to the heavenly body, but Luna carried the sense of a deity and mensis of the physical body whose movements help us tell time.

Word Nerds Unite!

Read More Word of the Week Posts

Inhuman Reactions

Inhuman Reactions

23 When He got into the boat, His disciples followed Him. 24 And behold, a violent storm developed on the sea, so that the boat was being covered by the waves; but Jesus Himself was asleep. 25 And they came to Him and woke Him, saying, “Save us, Lord; we are perishing!” 26 He *said to them, “Why are you afraid, you men of little faith?” Then He got up and rebuked the winds and the sea, and it became perfectly calm. 27 The men were amazed, and said, “What kind of a man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey Him?” ~ Matthew 8:23-27 (NASB)

In a book study in my church a few weeks ago, we were give four Bible passages (the one above, Matt 8:1-3 [leper who was cleansed], Matt 9:2-7 [paralytic whose friends brought him to be healed], and Matt 9:20-22 [woman with the issue of blood]) to read and then asked, “Which one do you most connect with or relate to?”

We talked through all of them, but in my group, the first, gut reaction was that we connected with the story of the disciples on the stormy sea. Because which of us hasn’t felt as though we’re in the midst of a storm at some point in our lives? Who among us hasn’t been in a literal storm that was scary? But even more, who hasn’t been in an emotional or circumstancial one?

Much like the disciples, I bet our instincts were right-on. We know to run to Jesus, just like they did. We know to cry out, “Save us, Lord! We’re dying here!”

But when we read that passage above, it becomes clear that Jesus’ method of saving them was not what they were expecting. They were shocked. HUGELY shocked. This–calming the very wind and waves–was not something they thought He could do.

So…what did they expect?

As I pondered the question, only one thing came to mind: they were expecting a normal, human reaction. They expected Him to wake up from His nap and lend a hand. They expected Him to maybe grab an oar or a line to a sail. Maybe even to lead them in a prayer for salvation asking God to calm the seas.

Jesus didn’t do that. He didn’t react as a human would. He didn’t do the human thing. He calmed the wind and the waves. He spoke, and it was so. Nature obeyed.

Then look at that story in Matthew 9:2-7, when the paralytic is brought by his friends to Jesus. They were obviously expecting something physical–a healing. Why else bring someone to a healer? They were demanding an appointment with the Great Physician.

But again, what did Jesus do? He looked at the faith of those friends and the paralyzed man and said, “Take courage, son. Your sins are forgiven.”

He was still paralyzed at that moment. Let that sink in. He’d come to Jesus for a healing in his legs, but Jesus looked and saw something much more important. He saw souls in need of a savior, and He offered that man the better good. He offered Him eternity. Salvation. Forgiveness.

And what does the man do?

We don’t actually know–we don’t see his reaction. But the Gospel writers certainly didn’t record any complaining on the part of the man or his friends. Nor do we see them saying, “Hey, wait a minute…who do you think you are? You can’t forgive sins.” Nope, only scribes were thinking that. And it was in response to their disbelief that He healed the man physically too, to offer them something visible.

But it wasn’t His first response. His first response, as always, was more concerned with the soul than the body. And I like to think (since we’re not told otherwise) that when that man had his sins forgiven, he was too overwhelmed with the peace and joy of that to even care that his legs still weren’t working right.

Then Jesus issued a command: “Take up your mat and go home.”

I love that, unlike some healings we see, where Jesus physically acts and the results follow, this one relies on the faith of the recipient. What if the man had shaken his head and said, “Lord, I can’t. That’s why I’m here.”?

My guess is that healing wouldn’t have followed, because he didn’t follow the word of the Lord. But he does. As simple as that. He stands up. Rolls up the mat his friends had been carrying him on. And he goes home. Presumably he had that faith even before he came, otherwise why would they have done so?

But I imagine it was all the more intense because he’d just been forgiven. Something no man could ever do for him.

Doctors can help heal us.
Prophets raised the dead and healed people many times.
The disciples themselves healed plenty.

But only Jesus could look a man in the eye and say, “Your sins are forgiven.” That was the real miracle done that day. The miracle of Jesus tending not the human, physical need, but one so much deeper. So much bigger.

How often, when we take our hurts and our troubles and our broken hearts to God, do we expect Him to react like us? Like humans? To tend to the physical in regular ways?

What if instead of lending a hand in the boat, we expect Him to calm the seas? What if, instead of fixing our circumstances, we trust Him to heal our hearts?

What if we expected our God to do something more than our human selves can do?

Word of the Week – Resurrect

Word of the Week – Resurrect

Did you know that resurrect didn’t exist as a word until the 1770s?!

I know, go ahead. Shake your head and said, “Nuh uh!” I know I did. But it’s true!

Resurrect is what etymologists refer to as a “back-formation.” Which is to say, we’ve had the noun, resurrection, in the English language pretty much forever (since about 1300), so eventually people just assumed it came from a verb (correct, it did) and began using that verb, resurrect. But it’s technically (or was technically) incorrect–that’s not the verb form of the word.

The noun resurrection came to us from Latin, via French. The Latin verb is resurgere, meaning “to rise again, to appear again.” Most Biblical translations will say that Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, and that Christ himself was raised from the dead. We could also say the proper verb…resurge. That’s what would have been used until the 1770s.

When resurrection made its way into English around 1300, it was specifically talking about the resurrection of Christ. And by extension, “the resurrection of the dead in the last days” that He promised. In the 1500s, people began to use it metaphorically or in less-sacred senses.

Whatever the correct verb form, I pray everyone enjoys this season where we celebrate the resurrection of our Lord…to commemorate when He resurged. 😉

Word Nerds Unite!

Read More Word of the Week Posts

Why Did He Die?

Why Did He Die?

30 The Pharisees and their scribes began grumbling to His disciples, saying, “Why do you eat and drink with the tax collectors and sinners?” 31 And Jesus answered and said to them, It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous to repentance, but sinners.” ~Luke 5:30-32

When I read the verses above as a teenager, I remember frowning and reading them again. Wait a minute, I thought. Why does He say this? Paul tells us we are ALL sinners, that NONE of us is righteous…and Jesus surely knew that. Right? So what’s He saying here?

It’s a valid question. Because we DO know that we are all sinners. Which means that He came to call us ALL to repentance. We ALL need His healing touch.

But not everyone will admit it. Not everyone will go to that Great Physician, even though they need it. Plenty of people, then and now, think of it as “us” (the righteous) versus “them” (the sinners). And what’s Jesus’ response to that? “Guess what–I came for them. So until you admit you’re one of ‘them,’ I guess you’re not at the table with Me.”

A few weeks ago, I conducted a little experiment on social media. I commented on a post condemning the Left, which used some really nasty names, asking if perhaps we’d make more strides if we didn’t villainize them. Well, after a number of comments over the course of a week, one appeared that had me gaping. In which a man condemned me to hell for trying to understand a different perspective. I made it clear I was not CONDONING certain behavior, simply trying to understand it so that I knew how to pray for people and how to love them like Christ loves them. And THAT was the thing he said would send me to hell. Trying to understand someone I don’t agree with. He accused me of “cavorting with evil.”

I immediately thought of that Scripture above, when the so-called “faithful” accused Christ of hanging out with sinners. 

Jesus is where the sinners are, friends. But they don’t stay sinners when they recognize their need for Him. Or rather, they become sinners saved by grace. Are our political “enemies” suddenly beyond His hand just because they haven’t accepted Him yet? Or because they understand things differently? Do we really think the answer is to condemn them all, along with anyone who tries to understand them?

Jesus certainly didn’t think so. When His disciples wanted to rain down fire and brimstone, He rebuked them. Most versions leave it at that, but some manuscripts add this: “You do not know of what kind of spirit you are; for the Son of Man did not come to destroy people’s lives, but to save them.”

As we progress through Holy Week, I think this is an important scripture to keep in mind. Jesus was on His way to Jerusalem, in His final days on earth, when this happened. His disciples have been with Him for three years already, and still they think this is the right action. To prove their power. To prove their might. To wipe from the earth a Samaritan town (so not among the “faithful”) who didn’t welcome Him.

But Jesus’ eyes were already on the cross. He knew His purpose. And it was not to destroy. It was to save.

That needs to be our purpose too. NOT to prove our power. NOT to use it to destroy our enemies.

To love them as Christ did, so that they may be saved.

Jesus didn’t come to die for those who thought they could get to heaven on their own, who have the right ideas or the right education or are members of the right political party or the right church. He came to die for sinners.

For those who, upon meeting Him, recognize their need for Him.
For those who don’t confuse strength with power.
For those willing to beat their chests and cry out, “Have mercy on me, a sinner!” instead of sneering at those who we perceive as unrighteous.

Tomorrow, we remember the day Christ gave His all, His very life, on the cross. Not for the righteous. For the sinners. For us–all of us. For them.

Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world.
Have mercy on us.
Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world.
Have mercy on us.
Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world.
Grant us peace.