Glad you came

me and my very own ragamuffins

When you live in a mid-size city with teenagers you drive a lot. Because the city is too small for robust public transportation. And the city is too big to walk or bike to the all the daily places you need to go.

You spend a lot of time in the car.

We have a system. On the way "there" (where ever there is) girl child sits in the front seat. On the way back (from there) boy child sits in the front seat. It's the genius plan the ragamuffins came up with to solve the endless fighting about who gets the front seat. You can't imagine what a big deal this is.

As we spend so much time in four-wheeled transit to and fro, mostly I make our trio of humanity listen to a steady flow of nonstop public radio. You know, those calming voices of war and strife. I give a thousand thanks for Iowa Public Radio. But every once in a while I let the front seat designee choose the music and sometimes I like it.

Our song du jour is a peppy tune that's easy to dance to, if not for sitting in a square box, put out by a British boy band, apparently. It's called "Glad you came." It's just a nice song.

"I think this would be a great funeral song," I say to the kids. "You know, like a celebration, like everyone's glad this person existed. I want this for my funeral."

"What a great idea, mom!" they said. No they didn't. They pretty much didn't say anything. I was talking to myself.

"No, actually, this would be a great birthing song, you know, celebrating a new life that has come into the world," I say. "Get it? I'm glad you came."

"Yeah, mom, I love that idea!" the kids say in unison. Just kidding, they didn't really say that.

Boy child actually had ear buds in so he didn't hear a word I said. Girl child shares my fondness for this song, but I'm sure she's not associating it with transitioning from the before and to the after. I'm pretty sure the boy band doesn't mean that either. Still, it's nice. Reminds me that I'm glad my kids are here, and to be perfectly honest I wouldn't have always said that. There were many times I wouldn't have said that. And even these days, when it seems that every second is sucked into getting them here and there, I'm not always sure.

But for a few minutes, when we blast this song on the Pioneer system in my new little car, I believe it a lot. We especially like the Glee version of the song (as we often do).

Sending this with lots of love, this mother's day, to all of you who care for children, who contribute to children's charities, who help with the care of children, who teach children, who give us jobs so we can support our children, who befriend me so I don't strangle my children, who advocate for women's health so we don't die from bearing children. Yup, it takes a village. Sending a special shout out to my mom, Diane Mork, and to all the people who do the same for her. I'm glad you came.

Enjoy this 2 minutes and 45 seconds of happiness. . .

Thanks again

Thanks to everyone for participating in the Religion & Media blog tour with Dr. Mary Hess last Friday. Your questions and comments were fascinating! If you were a lurker, I thank you too. For a simple wrap up, I want to offer these links:

Mary Hess' blog, Tensegrities.

The blog tour continues this week with Mark Vitalis Hoffman, Associate Professor of Biblical studies at Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. Of course you are all welcome and encouraged to participate or track the conversation.

If you missed the day Mary Hess stopped by The Snake Charmer's Wife, you can still check out the discussion. Comments are always welcome. Click here, scroll to bottom, click the word "comments."

And finally, you may wish to consider the new degree program, an M.A. with an emphasis in Media & Religion, a partnership between Luther Seminary and Gettysburg Seminary, core faculty including Mary Hess. (I find this so tempting, but I should probably wait a while before putting my family through another degree program.) But I encourage YOU to check this out! It looks like students can work online and intensive (which was the design of my MFA program). Think about it.

Cheers!

Let the discussion begin

For the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg Blog Tour on Religion & Media, Dr. Mary Hess responds to questions posed by The Snake Charmer's Wife. Please add your voice to the conversation! Click on the word “COMMENTS” at the very bottom of this post. And see the specific question Dr. Hess would like to hear from you about at the end of this post. On Friday, she will respond to your comments. Facebook me or send me an email if you have questions: terrispeirs@yahoo.com.


Check out Mary Hess's blog, Tensegrities.

(1) How can churches protect and encourage GBLTQ youth?In Iowa, we just buried another young man who committed suicide because of bullying after he came out gay. This boy happened to be a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the denomination I share with many SCW readers (though not all). Many people in my congregation, St. John's Lutheran Church in Des Moines, are concerned for the spiritual and physical protection of GBLTQ youth. What are your recommendations for steps churches can take in keeping these kids safe and loved, especially in the face of hate messages from other Christian sources?

Mary Hess:
This is such a crucial question! Some of the best things churches can do have to do with being active in digital environments already. So, proactively being present in facebook means that church members can keep their ears open for people who seem to be crying out for affirmation and support, and church members can be wise voices that stand up and squash bullying.

We need to reach out and create safe spaces for youth, in particular, and many youth aren't ready to come anywhere near a church. So reaching out in digital environments is really crucial, as is supporting efforts by more "secular' organizations.

I also think that churches can be much more effective than in the past, at connecting people to good resources. I like the "Believe Out Loud" site, for instance (http://www.believeoutloud.com/), and I love some of the videos that were made as part of the "It gets better" project (http://www.itgetsbetter.org/).

There are also resources that are not focused so much on religious themes, but education about GLBTQ issues more generally. I think the GLSEN is awesome (http://www.glsen.org/cgi-bin/iowa/all/home/index.html), for instance.

I think it's also crucial to remember that for every person who is willing to come out, there are many more who are still too afraid. So the basic messages inside your church -- the things you say when you think there are no GLBTQ people around -- are even more important. Are you respectful of people's integrity at all times? Are you building spaces in which everyone is able to be fully themselves? Are you supporting listening spaces where people can experience what it is to listen for understanding? (I love the Public Conversations Project resources, for instance: http://www.publicconversations.org/)

Here, by the way, is one of my favorite prayers on this topic: http://www.religioused.org/tensegrities/archives/5914

(2) What do you make of theYouTube video: "Why I hate religion but love Jesus"?A young man, Jefferson Bethke, created this video arguing that "Jesus and religion are on opposite spectrums," when people don't practice what they preach. The video, titled "Why I Hate Religion But Love Jesus," had already surpassed 2 million views just two days after it was posted on Jan. 10. And the controversial topic generated an onslaught of more than 30,000 conflicting reactions in the video's comments section, according to the Huffington Post. What's the take-away for faith communities?

Mary Hess:
I thought that video -- and the phenomenon that grew around it -- was fascinating! Clearly Bethke struck a chord which resonated across the net. I don't know how many -- but clearly in the hundreds -- video responses were created and posted. I remember thinking, when I first saw it, that it was such a Protestant lament. And sure enough, several days later there was an explicitly Catholic response posted (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ru_tC4fv6FE&feature=youtu.be <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ru_tC4fv6FE&feature=youtu.be>). But even that response didn't really resonate with me. I would have preferred one in which a diverse community of people gathered in the midst of social justice work to talk about how they love Jesus and how religion has helped them to embody that love.

I think one big take-away has to do with recognizing resonance, and then building on it. In other words, rather than trying to"manufacture" interest in something, keep your ears and eyes and heart open, and be willing to share what you're thinking and feeling. We need to help our church members learn how to create and produce digital stories (resources here: http://www.storyingfaith.org/). That means, among other things, helping church members to learn their own stories -- not simply their own individual stories, but also the stories of our faith community, and our God stories. We need to delve into the Bible, and into our traditions, and see what lives there, and what we need to bring new life to.

One of my more favorite recent books is Elizabeth Drescher's lovely little meditation "Tweet if you [heart] Jesus" -- which talks about "practicing church in the digital reformation." We need to become much more adept at doing this!

(3) Tied up in these two questions is a conversation around why the dominant voice of Christianity seems to be such an extremest one. Is this just my perception? How can we put out there the loving/welcoming face of the church as opposed to "Do as we say or you're going to hell"? (This question comes with thanks  from Maryce Ramsey, Washington DC)

Mary Hess:
It's not just your perception, but I think it's a perception that is tied to popular news media. And that, in turn, has to do with certain kinds of 24/7 television news media. Fewer and fewer news organizations have the ability to actually investigate news, and they rely more and more on pre-produced, or spontaneously-produced (ie. talking head commentators), content. Thus the arrival of the bloviating opinionator – whose only cost is their salary, and whose “stickiness” (in terms of the length of time eyeballs remain on them) is often tied to their ability to produce “jolts” of adrenaline.

One reason why our news media are so full of disasters (or concerns about anticipated disasters) is that such stories are a routine source of adrenaline production. What is an alternative? Well, we know that individuals “shouting” can produce “stickiness,” but so can humor – and humor often provides for more complex engagement. Witness the ways in which The Daily Show with Jon Stewart covers religion.

Frankly, I think the messages of the mainline church are often more complex and ambiguous than the 15 second soundbites that typical “news” programs allow. I think we do better in the long run by cultivating relationships with the writers of television shows that have long narrative arcs. In those series – and here I think about shows like The West Wing, Battlestar Galactica, The Simpsons and so on – in these shows we have more opportunity to encounter representations of religion in all of its complex messiness in the midst of relationships, and to show the context in which mainline churches operate.

But beyond that strategy – which is long term, and requires thoughtful cultivation of relationship with writers – we ought to be putting out our own stories via digital media. This blog is a good example of how you’re connecting with a wide variety of pastoral leaders who are sharing the good news – both of Jesus Christ, and of the mainline church, in all sorts of ways.

(4) I've been thinking about the intersection of religion and media in terms of the "religious right" and the "religious left." Radio and television helped give rise to the religious right. In today's media landscape, younger people--who are wary of religious institutions and generally regarded as more liberal in their religious beliefs ("left")--are more likely to lean toward new media technologies and have those influence or reinforce what they think and believe. So is being on the religious left or right becoming increasingly influenced by how one engages various media, and therefore, is there a generational divide, and will that divide increase or decrease over time? (This question comes with thanks from Deb Bogaert, Virginia)

Mary Hess:
I don't think it's about the religious right or left so much as it is about differing practices with regard to media.

The example I find myself using most often to talk about this has to do with how Christian churches dealt with the advent of television, at least in the United States. Christian churches tended to respond in one of two ways. Either they were deeply excited about the possibilities for using television to spread the gospel widely, or they were deeply worried about the ways in which television content was damaging and potentially destructive of Christian faith.

At first glance those two positions might seem very different from each other. But if you think about it, both pretty much assume that the creator of the content controls its meaning. In the first instance Christians saw television as a way to pipe their content to many more people over a much wider area. In the second, Christians saw television as piping negative content directly into people's homes. Television was the "pipeline" through which content was poured, and the person receiving the content was considered to be a pretty passive recipient of that content. So more conservative evangelical churches helped to create the entire Christian broadcasting and publishing world, and more liberal Protestant churches focused on media literacy education, which was going to somehow "inoculate" people against negative content.

Frankly, I don't think either approach was all that successful in the long run. What we've learned, instead, is that media -- whether television, film, digital media, etc. -- are environments in which meaning is made, and the producer of a message does not control its reception. Media literacy educators learned, for instance, that far from "inoculating" people against negative content, we tended to inoculate them against religious community -- because people didn't want to 'give up' the television they loved, and were far more willing to turn their backs on religious community.

So a thoughtful approach to media today takes very seriously the "agency" of the audience. Scholars of digital media speak about "participatory culture" -- by which they mean that consumers of media are very often the producers of it as well. Spaces such as YouTube, Spotify, flickr, facebook, and so on are the focus of more and more of our attention.

I believe that Christian communities -- indeed, any religious communities -- need to venture into these spaces and reflect on how religious meaning is made there. Rather than boycotting them -- which is something many Christian communities have suggested that we do (a stance which reminds me of early media literacy educators) -- or entering into them entirely uncritically (a stance which reminds me of Christian broadcasting) -- we need to support people in learning how to produce their own messages in these media, and in doing so learn how to be critically engaged with them (which is actually the stance of current media educators). (See, for instance, NAMLE: http://namle.net/).

And a question from Mary Hess to you:
Where do you find yourself most theologically engaged these days? What are you doing or reading or singing or listening to or watching that gets you thinking about God or reflecting on your faith?

Thanks! To comment or ask more questions, just click "comments" below.

The competition

On the occasion of our 18 year anniversary coming up on Monday, I'm reflecting on the competition, the women who almost beat me out for Bob's attention so long ago. To name a few of them: Ginger, Mary Ann, the Mandrell Sisters, Bobby Jo, Billy Jo, and Betty Jo. There's more.

Sorry, ladies, I won.

Quite honestly, I truly could not even begin to compete with the women who I was up against, so it was pure grace that got me where I am today. And pure love, mercy, and kindness that got both of us to 18 years. We're two people who got lucky together. Blessed beyond belief.

Also, on the occasion of our anniversary, I'm posting my senior reading, some excerpts from my forthcoming memoir (super, super forthcoming) about Bob's liver failure. It was a time when I felt competition from another strange source. (Heads up for the bizarre alert.)

I'm ever so grateful to Bob for his willingness to be the subject of my writing, and the object of my life. Not something that just any man could do. And mostly, I'm grateful to Bob and our shared circle of love, how I plan to dedicate the book (if it ever gets to that point).

With love, T

Patching up the bleeding heart

Continuing on my long road of a bleeding heart career path, I'm pleased to introduce you to my new employer as of Monday, Children & Families of Iowa. We have a deal: I write grants for them, they help me and my family be together, stay healthy, live in a house, and go on vacations. Plus, I get to sleep better at night because I have this thing about always worrying about the sorry state of the world and my place in it. For example, I can't get images of Syrian children being shot in the knees, intentionally, by the Syrian army, many who are defecting for reasons such as this, out of my mind. Yet what can I really do about that? The answer, I think, lies in a twist on that Crosby, Stills, and Nash song: If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with.

Constant fretting about suffering children is pretty much a recipe for insanity. Maybe that's why I'm predisposed to searching the nonprofit sector for paying work. It seems like double dipping, possibly make a difference and pay your bills. (Although, trust me, I'm not at all suggesting that the nonprofit sector is any kind of utopia. I wish it didn't exist. I wish we lived in a way that bleeding heart organizations  were unnecessary and their accompanying egos and politics were moot.)

Yet, These days, simply being able to pay your bills is something for which to be enormously grateful. And that I am.

To get an idea of what CFI does, check out the cover article of a recent newsletter: "CFI Family Therapist Helps Mother Deal with Daughter's Rape."  I don't have any kind of profound comment for that except: more please.

Forever and always, my news of fresh employment comes with deepest gratitude to all of you who have helped me along the way, and there are many of you, including so many good folks at MovetheFood and the Des Moines Area Religious Council. What I really wish is that none of us had to work, and we could all simply live in creative community, making things such as sculptures and essays and children and cocktails. Until that happens, forever and always, I am committed to doing what I can to help others resolve issues of employment, unemployment, underemployment, and unhappy employment. A note for the arrogantly employed, you're not my audience.

I'd like to start right here by offering this resource of a life coach, from a wise and wonderful former colleague and friend. She does most of her coaching long distance, via phone or skype. If you are trying to find what makes your heart bleed, what makes you sleep at night, what kind of deal can you strike to pay your bills, maybe my friend can help you sort some things out.

With love, T

Not good for peaceful sleeping

Has anyone out there read the classic novel, "The Handmaid's Tale" by Margaret Atwood?

Last night, page 89, I was ready to hang it up for all the bleakness. There are some grisly scenes involving giant meat hooks, and I'm not one to be entertained by impaling human flesh with anything. Think: the Taliban joins forces with Focus on the Family and creates a society kept in check by teenage boys with big guns. I believe I had nightmares.

The setting is futuristic where environmental degradation has created a world in which most women are infertile for all the poisoning and pollution (and certainly men are infertile too, but it's illegal to call men infertile, it's always the women's fertility at issue), so most women are "unwomen" and most babies are "unbabies." The women who by chance do carry working ovaries have the option of becoming a Handmaid, a role of sexual slavery, bearing children for upper class military families, submitting to strange rituals in conception and birth so that the Wife-class of women receive the babies as their own.

And whoa bessy, can Margaret Atwood concoct strange rituals. Although in the author's notes she insists that everything she put in the book is based on truths from different times and places.

So this morning, page 93 brings on "the ceremony," what this society calls the process of conception, for lack of a better phrase. Bizarre. Later the reader finds that the birthing process is equally strange. I'll let you read for yourself the details but I'll say that it's three mostly clothed human beings, united in a most peculiar way. The most opposite of intimacy you could possibly get, which is actually the point of the entire society, to ban human interaction on pretty much all levels.

It's strange, alright, but I couldn't stop reading. And now, on page 163, the reader discovers what the Commander of the house wants most, what is most contraband, what is most forbidden, what is most lacking. I won't give away any spoilers here, in case you haven't yet read the book, but I will say it's pretty surprising. Margaret Atwood is genius.

I'll close with this review from the Washington Post Book World: "A novel that brilliantly illuminates some of the darker interconnections between politics and sex...Just as the world of Orwell's '1984' gripped our imaginations, so with the world of Atwood's handmaid!"

At page 163 the reader still doesn't know what happens to unwomen and unbabies. This reader isn't sure she wants to know. This is another book that I'll probably never watch the movie rendition. Too visually graphic for my taste. But a real page turner, although I've decided to only read it during daylight hours. "The Handmaid's Tale" does not make for peaceful sleeping.

Your thoughts?

On May 4 we welcome Dr. Mary Hess right *here*

Dr. Mary Hess explores
religion and media on many levels,
for example, check out
 her treatment of  the Trayvon Martin case.

I'm thrilled to announce that on May 4 The Snake Charmer's Wife will participate in a blog tour featuring the incredible Dr. Mary Hess, Associate Professor of Educational Leadership at Luther Seminary, St. Paul, Minn. 

This is how it will work: I've been invited to submit questions on religion and media based on Snake Charmer readers' interest. Mary will respond, I'll post here, and then throughout the day on May 4, you are invited to comment and Mary will continue respond to your comments.

Got it? Ok, so here are the questions I submitted:

1.) How can churches protect and encourage GBLTQ youth?
In Iowa, tragically, we just buried another young man who committed suicide because of bullying after he came out gay. This boy happened to be a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the denomination I share with many SCW readers (though not all). Many people in my congregation, St. John's Lutheran Church in Des Moines, are concerned for the spiritual and physical protection of GBLTQ youth. What are your recommendations for steps churches can take in keeping these kids safe and loved, especially in the face of hate messages from other Christian sources?


2.)What do you make of theYouTube video: "Why I hate religion but love Jesus"? 
A young man, Jefferson Bethke, created this video arguing that "Jesus and religion are on opposite spectrums," when people don't practice what they preach. The video, titled "Why I Hate Religion But Love Jesus," had already surpassed 2 million views just two days after it was posted on Jan. 10. And the controversial topic generated an onslaught of more than 30,000 conflicting reactions in the video's comments section, according to the Huffington Post. What's the take-away for faith communities?


3.) Tied up in these two questions is a conversation around why the dominant voice of Christianity seems to be such an extremest one. Is this just my perception? How can we put out there the loving/welcoming face of the church as opposed to "Do as we say or you're going to hell"? 

4.) Exploring the intersection of religion and media in terms of the "religious right" and the "religious left." Radio and television helped give rise to the religious right. In today's media landscape, younger people--who are wary of religious institutions and generally regarded as more liberal in their religious beliefs ("left")--are more likely to lean toward new media technologies and have those influence or reinforce what they think and believe. So is being on the religious left or right becoming increasingly influenced by how one engages various media, and therefore, is there a generational divide, and will that divide increase or decrease over time?


If there's yet another topic you'd like addressed on May 4, let me know. Meanwhile, be sure to check out Mary's powerful blog, Tensegrities.

Mary Hess Bio: 
Mary Hess is Associate Professor of Educational Leadership at Luther Seminary in St. Paul, Minnesota. Since 2003 she has written the blog Tensegrities(www.religioused.org/tensegrities/). A Roman Catholic Layperson with eclectic interests, Hess received her B.A. in American Studies from Yale University; her M.T.S. is from Harvard University; and her Ph.D. is from Boston College. She served as a core member of the International Study Commission on Media, Religion and Culture. She serves on the editorial board of Journal of Media and Religion, Religious Education and Religion and Education in the Public Sphere. Visitwww2.luthersem.edu/mhess/web/Home.html to learn more about her publications and teaching.


Cheers, Terri