Genesis 8:1-19

January 25, 2011Marty Leave a comment

But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and all the domestic animals that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind blow over the earth, and the waters subsided; the fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained, and the waters gradually receded from the earth. At the end of one hundred and fifty days the waters had abated; and in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. The waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains appeared.

At the end of forty days Noah opened the window of the ark that he had made and sent out the raven; and it went to and fro until the waters were dried up from the earth. Then he sent out the dove from him, to see if the waters had subsided from the face of the ground; but the dove found no place to set its foot, and it returned to him to the ark, for the waters were still on the face of the whole earth. So he put out his hand and took it and brought it into the ark with him. He waited another seven days, and again he sent out the dove from the ark; and the dove came back to him in the evening, and there in its beak was a freshly plucked olive leaf; so Noah knew that the waters had subsided from the earth. Then he waited another seven days, and sent out the dove; and it did not return to him any more.

In the six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and saw that the face of the ground was drying. In the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry. Then God said to Noah, ‘Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’ wives with you. Bring out with you every living thing that is with you of all flesh—birds and animals and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth—so that they may abound on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the earth.’ So Noah went out with his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives. And every animal, every creeping thing, and every bird, everything that moves on the earth, went out of the ark by families.

This part of chapter 8 gets more confusing as the two sources have been comingled again. Both P and J have pieces in this part of the flood story.

Apparently after 150 days the water abated and the ark came to rest upon Mount Ararat. Okay, sounds good.

But it rained for 40 days and 40 nights, after which Noah sent out a dove to look to see if the flood was over, but it found no place to land so the dove returned.

Noah waits another seven days and again he sends out the dove. This time the dove returns with a freshly plucked olive tree leaf. But Noah brings the dove back in and waits again another seven days.

Again Noah sends out the dove. This time it does not return.

At this time Noah removes the cover of the ark and God commands him to leave the ark….after 40 days and nights, plus 14 days of waiting for the waters to subside.

Obviously the math does not calculate properly here. How can Noah leave the ark after 54 days, but the ark has not come to rest upon Mount Ararat, which is due to happen 96 days after the flood began?

So was it 54 days or 150 days?

It may in fact have been both. The reason I say this is there is much archeological evidence to support a great flood that occurred roughly 10 000 years ago. Many of the costal regions flooded, never to return, when the ice caps began to melt and sea levels rose.

This type of cataclysmic event would naturally be documented in the sacred texts of many people, which could explain why the days do not line up. But just because the days do not line up does not mean there was not a “Great Flood”.

For instance, here is an example of a 10 000 year village in the English Channel. http://www.livescience.com/history/070809_aqua_dig.html

There are also other examples, a 10 000 year old pyramid off the coast of Japan, another temple complex off the coast of India from the same time period. There obviously was a great flood that people interpreted as an act of God.

So does it matter then that the Great Flood may not have happened, at least not according to the biblical version? Does it matter that the flood can be shown to be the melting of the ice caps after the last ice age?

Maybe it matters to some, but not to me. It doesn’t matter to me whether this story is “true” in the historical sense, it still carries with it many truths that God wishes us to know and understand.

Stewardship of the earth is vital, as we learn from this passage, because the earth is a delicate balance. And if we continue down the current path, then we may see another great flood as the ice caps melt from global warming and New York city disappears, along with many costal towns and cities

Looking beyond the history or interpretation of history, it is always important when reading the Torah to remember that God preserved this story not because of its scientific factual-ness, but because within it is a truth that He wishes us to understand.

So let’s sit down and keep reading our way through the Torah and eventually through the rest of the bible.

Copyright and Fair Dealing

January 17, 2011Marty 4 Comments

I couldn't resist the temptation (or the irony)....

Copyright is an issue discussed in many churches far less than it ought to be. I have seen countless examples of churches breaking or ignoring copyright law, mainly for one of two reasons:

Ignorance of the copyright laws
The belief that because of its non-profit status or overall ‘good intentions’ the church is somehow exempt from certain laws

Of course, it should go without saying that neither of these are valid reasons for breaking copyright law or any laws for that matter. But somehow this one seems to slip through the cracks.

So what can we, as a church, do to protect ourselves and protect and honour the producers of materials that we wish to use? How can we use materials fairly while respecting those who used their time and talents to produce them? How can we understand what copyright law covers and what is available for Fair Dealing?

At the root, education is the key. Ignorance of the laws simply cannot be an excuse. I for one have unfortunately broken copyright laws because of my personal lack of understanding. As such, I have recently taken it upon myself to begin to educate myself about copyright law. Realizing how little I know, I was inspired to write about the experience and share the knowledge that I discovered.

Why Copyright Law?

Copyright laws exist to protect content creators and ensure that they receive fair compensation for their work, which may also be their livelihood. The term Fair Use is an American term and is often used in explaining copyright law, but Canada has a slightly different approach called Fair Dealing.

When considering Fair Dealing, there are a number of things to keep in mind:

The Purpose of the Dealing Is it for research, private study, criticism, review or news reporting? It expresses that “these allowable purposes should not be given a restrictive interpretation or this could result in the undue restriction of users’ rights.” In particular, the Court gave a “a large and liberal interpretation” to the notion of research, stating that “lawyers carrying on the business of law for profit are conducting research”.

The Character of the Dealing How were the works dealt with? Was there a single copy or were multiple copies made? Were these copies distributed widely or to a limited group of people? Was the copy destroyed after being used? What is the general practice in the industry?

The Amount of the Dealing How much of the work was used? What was the importance of the infringed work? Quoting trivial amounts may alone sufficiently establish fair dealing as there would not be copyright infringement at all. In some cases even quoting the entire work may be fair dealing. The amount of the work taken must be fair in light of the purpose of the dealing.

Alternatives to the Dealing Was a “non-copyrighted equivalent of the work” available to the user? Was the dealing “reasonably necessary to achieve the ultimate purpose”?

The Nature of the Work Copying from a work that has never been published could be more fair than from a published work “in that its reproduction with acknowledgement could lead to a wider public dissemination of the work – one of the goals of copyright law. If, however, the work in question was confidential, this may tip the scales towards finding that the dealing was unfair.”

Effect of the Dealing on the Work Is it likely to affect the market of the original work? “Although the effect of the dealing on the market of the copyright owner is an important factor, it is neither the only factor nor the most important factor that a court must consider in deciding if the dealing is fair.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_dealing#Canada

Individuals, churches and other organizations may use these categories determine whether they may use copyright materials. Although during my time in the church, I must admit, I have witnessed many obvious violations to these rules due to either ignorance or arrogance.

To help individual churches and priest conform to copyright law in Canada, what follows is some general infractions that occurs and some general information of how to comply with copyright law.

Images

General

When looking for images for a website, blog post, sermon series or poster, the first instinct of many churches is to do a google search and take the first image found. This is easy, but it’s also a violation of Fair Dealing.

Many artists are willing to allow free use of their images but require acknowledgement of their work. This creates traffic back to their portfolio and can increase sales and provide for their livelihood.

Something also to consider, is some artist will allow certain organizations to use their materials for free but not others. Artists are allowed to determine the “moral” use of their images. For instances, an atheistic artist may allow free use of his/her image except for religious organizations.

Even when an image is free, it is best to check with the artist or read the parameters that govern the use of the image.

Images in Sermons

Using a photographer’s pictures or a designer’s Photoshop files in a sermon PowerPoint presentation, may be allowed, but only if acknowledgement of the artist is sited at the end of the presentation or the artist has given permission for its use.

Images in promotional materials

Using unauthorized images in church flyers for a parish event would constitute copyright infringement even if acknowledgment were given to the artist. In this case permission from the artist is needed or the image needs to be purchased.

Solution

When it comes to images, there is a wealth of free resources online. http://www.christianphotos.net/, http://www.creativemyk.com/ and sxc.hu are excellent starting points for churches looking for royalty-free images.

If you have an image that you want to use but don’t know where it came from, http://www.tineye.com is a website that can help find the original source of the image. Once you know that, you can ask permission or determine if using it would be considered Fair Dealing.

Films

Pizza and Movie night or Film and Discussion groups are a common educational tool in many churches. But often, these are in direct violation of copyright law and Fair Dealing.

These free nights affect the market value of the copyright work.

Solution

Fortunately, there is once again a simple solution. A licence to show many movies at church events will cost only between $60-205, depending on your church’s size. http://canada.cvli.com/main.cfm

Music

Most churches though do purchase a One License or CCLI. (http://www.onelicense.net/ or http://www.ccli.com/). Somehow, music copyright has been impressed in us more than other forms of media. However, infringements still occurs when a priest or pastor wants to add in a new piece of music or make changes to a piece without due diligence.

For instance, changing content (substituting words) to appeal to a particular theology violates copyright law. The new piece of music would be considered derivative work.

Solution

In this case, awareness is key. Understanding the terms of use of the licence that the church owns and following it will solve most if not all of the music broadcast issues.

For recorded music, a SOCAN licence can be purchased from http://www.socan.ca/. This license will allow previously recorded music to be played at your event, such as WOW Praise music played during a dinner or such.

Why it is important

Why is it so important for churches and church leaders to adhere to the Canadian Copyright Law? Aside from protecting the rights of the artist, it becomes an issue of hypocrisy. If we wish to speak ethically about the world then we simply must comply with the laws and not circumvent them when it becomes burdensome.

The Christian life requires constant diligence and this is especially true for the leaders of a Christian community. After all, if we can’t bother to adhere to the law, then why would the parishioners listen to our message? As Christ lived as an example, so to must the church.

The longer that the church compromises copyright law the more damage is done to our reputation. We begin to lose our credibility to speak ethically to a society, about how we ought to be as a people, a culture and civilization. In many cases we quickly begin to resemble the Pharisees that Jesus denounced. And once our reputation begins to suffer, the more irrelevant we become.

Genesis 7

January 7, 2011Marty Leave a comment

Then the Lord said to Noah, ‘Go into the ark, you and all your household, for I have seen that you alone are righteous before me in this generation. Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and its mate; and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and its mate; and seven pairs of the birds of the air also, male and female, to keep their kind alive on the face of all the earth. For in seven days I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights; and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground.’ And Noah did all that the Lord had commanded him.

Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters came on the earth. And Noah with his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives went into the ark to escape the waters of the flood. Of clean animals, and of animals that are not clean, and of birds, and of everything that creeps on the ground, two and two, male and female, went into the ark with Noah, as God had commanded Noah. And after seven days the waters of the flood came on the earth.

In the six-hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened. The rain fell on the earth for forty days and forty nights. On the very same day Noah with his sons, Shem and Ham and Japheth, and Noah’s wife and the three wives of his sons, entered the ark, they and every wild animal of every kind, and all domestic animals of every kind, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, and every bird of every kind—every bird, every winged creature. They went into the ark with Noah, two and two of all flesh in which there was the breath of life. And those that entered, male and female of all flesh, went in as God had commanded him; and the Lord shut him in.

The flood continued for forty days on the earth; and the waters increased, and bore up the ark, and it rose high above the earth. The waters swelled and increased greatly on the earth; and the ark floated on the face of the waters. The waters swelled so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered; the waters swelled above the mountains, covering them fifteen cubits deep. And all flesh died that moved on the earth, birds, domestic animals, wild animals, all swarming creatures that swarm on the earth, and all human beings; everything on dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died. He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the ground, human beings and animals and creeping things and birds of the air; they were blotted out from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those that were with him in the ark. And the waters swelled on the earth for one hundred and fifty days.

We have arrived at the Great Flood in Genesis. This is an intricate story that needs to be broken down to see the various parts, namely the different sources or editors of the text.

The first thing we should notice is that in the previous chapter (6:19) Noah is told by God to bring two of every kind of living animal, male and female. Yet at the beginning of this chapter in verse 2 Noah now is to take seven pairs of the clean animals and only a pair of the animals that are not clean.

This discrepancy is due to the first part of chapter 7 is written by P (the Priestly source), while chapter 6 was written by J (the Yahwist source). And if you remember there was some 5 or 6 centuries between those two sources.

But why add to the story and scripture? Well for the priestly source, which is concerned with their worldview, the Temple and sacrifice at the Temple is central to the worship of God. The extra clean animals would therefore be needed for sacrifices, while the pair of unclean animals was brought on board the Ark to keep them alive. A slight revision.

Something for us to consider then is how does our world and our worldview affect scripture? As language evolves, do we change the meaning of scripture and re-interpret or translated it in new and perhaps misleading ways? Should we only read scripture then in its purest form or translation, like the NRSV (New Revised Standard Version) and ignore all copies of the Message (scripture in today’s vernacular?)

There definitely seems to be a longing in humanity to twist scripture to their own ends, as did the Priestly source. If we can add, or alter scripture just enough then the more difficult parts can be removed and it can be sanitized for us. But then it is obviously not the word of God anymore, or at least not entirely.

We are also introduced to the number 40 in this passage. 40 is important because it comes to signal the amount of time required for trial and/or testing. For example the Israelites wondered in the desert with Moses for 40 years, Jesus is tempted in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights and likewise God makes it rain for 40 days and nights, causing the flood.

Perhaps the 40 days and 40 nights as a time of trial and testing for Noah may also be a time of trial and testing for us also. We are after all approaching Lent soon, and using those 40 days that are designed for us to walk with Jesus in the desert would be a good time for us to sit down with scripture and really dive deep into the word of God.

40 days to sit with scripture, whether that is one passage that you have always struggled with, or one chapter each day, the time of trial and testing that we endure, like Noah can help us come to understand what the word of God is truly saying aside from what our own worldviews and desires would prefer.

Genesis 6:9-22

December 7, 2010Marty Leave a comment

These are the descendants of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation; Noah walked with God. And Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight, and the earth was filled with violence. And God saw that the earth was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon the earth. And God said to Noah, ‘I have determined to make an end of all flesh, for the earth is filled with violence because of them; now I am going to destroy them along with the earth. Make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and out with pitch. This is how you are to make it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. Make a roof for the ark, and finish it to a cubit above; and put the door of the ark in its side; make it with lower, second, and third decks. For my part, I am going to bring a flood of waters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. But I will establish my covenant with you; and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. And of every living thing, of all flesh, you shall bring two of every kind into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds according to their kinds, and of the animals according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground according to its kind, two of every kind shall come in to you, to keep them alive. Also take with you every kind of food that is eaten, and store it up; and it shall serve as food for you and for them.’ Noah did this; he did all that God commanded him.

God’s decision to destroy all flesh he created because they were evil and filled with violence should give us pause. Especially as we look around at our world and the amount of violence that occurs each and every day. If this passage doesn’t worry you as a person of faith, then I am not sure any amount of discourse will help.

But as much as it worries, it should also give hope. Noah, who walked with God, is being saved from certain death because he was a righteous man. Now while God took Enoch, who also walked with Him, he decides instead to save Noah and his family and all the innocent animals of the earth.

Noah is to build the ark according to the instructions that he receives from God and when the time is right Noah is to save humanity and indeed all of creation. And for doing this, for obeying God, God promises to establish his covenant with Noah.

This is the first mention in the scriptures of a covenant, let alone “the” covenant. And it comes about because God promises to do something, flood the world and destroy all creation, and Noah promises to do something for God, obey God, build an ark and save what God has created.

The covenant is a joint endeavour and it requires a balance of sorts. It is like an equation, each side must be equal. Now I don’t mean to say that humanity is equal to God. What I am inferring here is that without the equal obligations or promises a covenant cannot exist.

This is the first example of the covenant in scriptures and the recipe is simple. God will protect you and give you life if you but obey. And if you obey, then God must fulfill His obligations.

Theologically this type of thinking has many problems and it is a problem that Paul will address in his letters when he talks about faith and works. But that would be getting way ahead of ourselves I think. We are after all only in Genesis at this point. And what is of interest is the contractual nature of the covenant, the quid pro quo.

This type of legal basis for the covenant will come to dominate the Jewish tradition. This is extremely important for Christians as we will see much later in scripture. But it is best that we keep this tucked away in the back of our mind. What should be noted and filed away in the back of your mind is how a covenant is established and administered.

Two promises fulfilled; one by God, another by Noah. Obey and you shall be saved.

Genesis 6:1-8

November 22, 2010Marty Leave a comment

When people began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose. Then the Lord said, ‘My spirit shall not abide in mortals for ever, for they are flesh; their days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’ The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterwards—when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans, who bore children to them. These were the heroes that were of old, warriors of renown.

The Lord saw that the wickedness of humankind was great in the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that he had made humankind on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. So the Lord said, ‘I will blot out from the earth the human beings I have created—people together with animals and creeping things and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.’ But Noah found favour in the sight of the Lord.

I apologies for taking so long to update. I have been struggling with this passage and what to say about it. The amount of questions that come from reading it just seemed to increase each time that I come back to it. In many ways it felt like I was reading the teaser for a new program on Space.

In this passage we have the sons of God who take human wives and have children. The children born are the heroes of old. Sounds very similar to Hercules and much of ancient Greek mythology. God, the high God has sons who are also divine that wonder the earth and take human sexual partners.

Also The Nephilim were on the earth in those days. The Nephilim are mythical giants. Perhaps similar to the Titans from Greek mythology, but that is nothing but shear speculation on my part.

I feel as though I should be getting my popcorn out and a giant diet Coke, sitting back and getting ready to watch the new screening of The Clash of the Titans. This is followed up with God watching humanity, seeing the wickedness of humans and deciding to blot out all of creation. Except that Noah has found favor with God.

Clearly those in ancient Israel did not see God has omniscient. God did not or could not foresee the wickedness of humanity. But this does explain previous passages where God spoke in the plural. God clearly was referring to his divine sons when speaking in the plural, perhaps even to a divine council of gods over which Yahweh was the supreme ruler.

Obviously this is pre-Christian understanding of the world, but what should be troubling for Christians in this passage is that according to doctrine, Jesus is the only son of God. Except here we have scripture that clearly stipulates to their being many sons of God. Of course this does not change that Jesus Christ is the first born of all creation and the first born of the dead. Those pieces of doctrine are unaffected by this passage.

The next thing we grapple with is that God is sorry that he had made humanity. Sorry implies that God is less than perfect. God made a mistake, or so he seems to be admitting.

Frankly, this passage should trouble Christians greatly because it challenges some of our basic assumptions about God. What it does highlights for us though is the mythological nature of Genesis and the first five books of the bible really. These foundational myths and stories are exactly that, stories. It is difficult for many Christians to accept that maybe God didn’t create the world according to the tales in Genesis. Having said that, that doesn’t preclude God from still being the creator.

Growing to a mature faith in God we come to realize that faith doesn’t provide certainty. Faith still is the confident belief or trust in a person, idea, or thing that is not based on proof. But we need to mix our faith with reason and understanding that within these stories is God’s revealed truth, maybe not literal truth but allegorical, mythological, eschatological and so on.

The sons of God took human wives and giants once roamed the earth. What does this tell us of our world and God’s action in it? To that I have no answer today, but a renewed desire to keep reading scripture in hopes that the answer will soon be found.

Genesis Chapter 5

November 11, 2010Marty 13 Comments

This is the list of the descendants of Adam. When God created humankind, he made them in the likeness of God. Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them ‘Humankind’ when they were created.

When Adam had lived for one hundred and thirty years, he became the father of a son in his likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth. The days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years; and he had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.

When Seth had lived for one hundred and five years, he became the father of Enosh. Seth lived after the birth of Enosh for eight hundred and seven years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years; and he died.

When Enosh had lived for ninety years, he became the father of Kenan. Enosh lived after the birth of Kenan for eight hundred and fifteen years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Enosh were nine hundred and five years; and he died.

When Kenan had lived for seventy years, he became the father of Mahalalel. Kenan lived after the birth of Mahalalel for eight hundred and forty years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Kenan were nine hundred and ten years; and he died.

When Mahalalel had lived for sixty-five years, he became the father of Jared. Mahalalel lived after the birth of Jared for eight hundred and thirty years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Mahalalel were eight hundred and ninety-five years; and he died.

When Jared had lived for one hundred and sixty-two years he became the father of Enoch. Jared lived after the birth of Enoch for eight hundred years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Jared were nine hundred and sixty-two years; and he died.

When Enoch had lived for sixty-five years, he became the father of Methuselah. Enoch walked with God after the birth of Methuselah for three hundred years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years. Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him.

When Methuselah had lived for one hundred and eighty-seven years, he became the father of Lamech. Methuselah lived after the birth of Lamech for seven hundred and eighty-two years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred and sixty-nine years; and he died.

When Lamech had lived for one hundred and eighty-two years, he became the father of a son; he named him Noah, saying, ‘Out of the ground that the Lord has cursed this one shall bring us relief from our work and from the toil of our hands.’ Lamech lived after the birth of Noah for five hundred and ninety-five years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Lamech were seven hundred and seventy-seven years; and he died.

After Noah was five hundred years old, Noah became the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

The desire to show that the history of Israel was no human accident, but that from the beginning it had been shaped by the sure and sovereign will of God, Genesis has constructed for us a genealogy. The descendants of Israel begin the telling of their history with the purposeful creation of Adam by God and then trace their genealogy from Adam to Noah, and then from Noah to Abraham.

This long chapter of begatting is P’s (the priestly source) attempts to draw a divine origin for the people of Israel, probably over and against the other surrounding peoples, such as the Babylonians. In such manner Israel becomes the People of God and all other civilizations become the “other” and need not be treated as equal.

For one, this would allow the People of God to justify their entry into the Promised Land as conquerors. So you could see how P would want to re-write divine origins to justify the actions of the nation. In a way it makes perfect sense.

It also allows a people to perform acts of brutality and aggression as the Chosen People of God. It is this same mentality that has lead the United States of America to the belief that their way of life is the best, since they are the new chosen people. Which prompts the desire to impose their way of life upon others in the name of freedom.

Aside from this there are a few other things that I wish to draw your attention to and perhaps this may support the idea that P has revised some of the early tradition and oral sources of J and E. In the previous chapter Cain knew his wife and she bore Enoch. And from Enoch line comes Lamech. But in this chapter we pick up the genealogy from Adam’s third son, Seth.

And from Seth we get a line that leads to, well you guest it, Enoch. Then it leads to Mathuselah and then Lamech, just like the previous chapter.

Is this P blending again, or is this a different genealogy altogether, but wiyj the same names? After all, the people of Israel cannot be descended from Cain; they would have to have a divine ancestry that traced back to Adam through his third son or they would be just like everyone else in the world. So is this revisionist again? Or are there two genealogies wit the same names?

The next thing of course is Enoch himself. Enoch walked with God. Does this mean he was a priest or prophet? Did he somehow know God while others did not? It would seem to be the case to me at least that he did know God in a special way.

And then he is no more because God takes him. Takes him where? Heaven? Since all others die, this seems very important in some way. Later in the tradition there is Elijah, who was taking up bodily into heaven, but others die and then ascend, like Moses. So is this a case of bodily going to heaven? Is it like Elijah’s bodily ascension?

Whatever the answer is, the importance of having a genealogy that has divine origins or divine creation is very important to every culture. As such we should not be surprised to see such a genealogy amongst the Hebrew scriptures, nor surprised that Christians claim this same genealogy.

The question is this though, does one need claim this genealogy to be considered made in the image and likeness of God?

Why should social media be important to the church?

November 6, 2010Marty 1 Comment

Social media’s importance, frankly, can be found in scripture. Matthew 28:18-19, the Great Commission to the disciples was and still is to go forth into the world baptizing in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and teaching all that Jesus had taught. Christians cannot be divorced of the call to go out and evangelize. It is who we are.

Social media allows the church and individual Christians to fulfill the Great Commission. Social media allows us to go where the next generation is and to engage with them openly and honestly. Yet many in the church are guarded and they doubt the importance of social media. But what if they knew…

Having a social media strategy is no longer an option for the church in North America. It simply is something we must do. With over 50% of the population of the planet under the age of 30 and 96% of millennials in North America having joined a social network, we can no longer afford to be silent.

After all, if we are not talking to them about Christ, then who is?

Does this mean we rush out and spend big money on social media, trusting the first person to promise a large ROI? Obviously not. We have to come to understand the social media environment and how it is changing and evolving. For example here is a social media map from 2005 courtesy of www.xkcd.com:

And here is one from 2010.

Sound research into the changing landscape will show that Myspace is not the place to break into the social media anymore. Also good research will also help you identify the demographics that you wish to reach. For instance, the fastest growing demographic on Facebook is women 55-65. Yet you are unlikely going to get that demographic on Twitter. Knowing what networks people frequent will undoubtedly shape the social media strategy that your parish and community employs.

Who you wish to reach becomes just as important as how. If you want to reach the next generation, then pull up a keyboard and jump in before it is too late.

Using Social Media and Letting Go

October 29, 2010Marty Leave a comment

I am not sure if there are any hard rules pertaining to social media. There are no prescribed dos and don’ts that will lead to eventual success. What to post, who to engage with are difficult questions and much of social media is being, well, social. It is engaging with the greater community and seeing where the conversation goes allowing it to unfold naturally.

Yet one of the toughest things to do for those that are new to social media is letting go. When you engage with others this means giving up control of your website, blog or Facebook page. People will comment, after all this is what is going to generate traffic and interest about you and your brand, or your church. What they will say though, you have no idea.

Does this mean you should monitor your web traffic to make sure nothing untoward is said about your brand? And when some disparaging comment is made, how do you handle it? Do you erase it, block the person, and eliminate the ability for comments to be posted? Do you practice censorship?

I should perhaps add a small caveat though. Racist comment or other forms of hate speech do not add to dialogue and this is perhaps the few instances that I would condone censoring comments.

But I can imagine the impulse is to block all comments that are negative. You don’t want your brand to be seen in a negative light. But this strategy has a negative effect. The people whose comments are blocked or erased will generally become angry at you or your organization. They will feel shut down, and no dialogue will ensue. Whatever their complaint was will now be magnified.

They will do what people normally do, they will talk. Maybe they will do it on their own blog or Facebook page. Maybe they will tell others offline. But you can be assured that what started as one negative comment that could have been dealt with in dialogue openly for all to see will quickly escalate and turn into a damage control situation.

Probably the best way to handle the negative comment is not to shut the conversation down, but to wait and allow one of your “brand evangelists” to address the comment for you. This way you continue to appear and remain open for dialogue and constructive criticism and your “brand evangelists” deal with the perceived negative comment.

I guess I should retract my first statement and propose one simple rule when using social media for your business or your church. Let go and let the conversation happen.

Genesis 4:17-26

October 22, 2010Marty 1 Comment

The Beginnings of Civilization

Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch; and he built a city, and named it Enoch after his son Enoch. To Enoch was born Irad; and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael the father of Methushael, and Methushael the father of Lamech. Lamech took two wives; the name of one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. Adah bore Jabal; he was the ancestor of those who live in tents and have livestock. His brother’s name was Jubal; he was the ancestor of all those who play the lyre and pipe. Zillah bore Tubal-cain, who made all kinds of bronze and iron tools. The sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.

Lamech said to his wives:
‘Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;
you wives of Lamech, listen to what I say:
I have killed a man for wounding me,
a young man for striking me.
If Cain is avenged sevenfold,
truly Lamech seventy-sevenfold.’

Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, for she said, ‘God has appointed for me another child instead of Abel, because Cain killed him.’ To Seth also a son was born, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to invoke the name of the Lord.

Are you ready for some begat-ing?

The Genesis story takes a very interesting twist here for me. To recap where we are, Adam and Eve have left the Garden of Eden and they had two sons, Cain and Abel. Cain attacked Abel and killed him. So now there are three people on earth and Cain decides to leave his mother and father’s side and God’s presence and wanders the earth alone.

During the course of his wonderings he finds, and “knows” his wife. That means sex, in case you didn’t know. Hey, not everyone in the world has known someone. But I digress.

Here is the problem for me and the classic Sunday school question, if there are only three people on the planet, were did Cain’s wife come from?

Seriously, and no arguments from silence either. First there are two creation stories and now we have people appearing so that Cain has a woman to marry and bear him a son.

Another interesting question is this, why is civilization formed from Cain and his descendents. It is only at the very end of the passage that we hear of Adam and Eve having another son, Seth.

We are approaching a point where we must start to ask the question, is Genesis history or is it mythological. It seems to me that it is mythological. These stories are not factual but and this is a big but, that doesn’t mean they are not true.

illustrated by Milo Winter

Let me explain. We have all heard the story of the tortoise and the hare. We know that this story tells us a truth right? Hard work and determination will win the day. Does it matter that a tortoise and a hare never actually raced? The story is still true right?

This seems to be the case with some or much of the Genesis story so far. It isn’t factual in a scientific sense, but it tells us a truth, whether that be a theological, metaphysical, epistemological, eschatological, mythological or normative truth.

In these stories that have been collected and preserved for us is God’s revealed truth. It would be rather presumptuous to think that God’s truth was limited to only science. God can and does reveal His truth to us in a myriad of ways, and story is but one way.
Knowing that God has revealed something to us let us go back to this passage and not worry about the fact there should only be three people on the planet, but let’s look at anew and see what truth it has to reveal to us.

Fresh Expressions Ministers vs. Social Media Douchebags – a match made in hell

October 19, 2010Marty 2 Comments

The Social Media Douchebag

Fads, trends, buzz words and industry jargon are the tools of the trade used by Social Media Douchebags to obfuscate their lack of skills and knowledge of the emerging social media industry.

They prey on unsuspecting people desperate to be part of the Web 2.0 revolution (see that, I inserted 5 year old jargon there to confuse you). According to the sales pitch, companies and individuals can and will fall increasingly behind the times and become irrelevant in today’s fast paced market.

Slick salespeople are ready to sell you on SEO (search engine optimization), LinkedIn profiles, blogs, cross-communication and community development through online resources like Twitter and Facebook. Through a synergistic application of new emerging techniques they will be able to monetize your blog into a book deal in no time flat. You will be able to produce your own commercials and broadcast them via Youtube, causing you and your brand to go viral!

Sound confusing? Don’t worry, there’s an emerging industry full of Social Media Douchebags who are more than happy to help you with everything from building your LinkedIn profile, to operating your Twitter account to managing your “brand” online. How else is a newbie supposed to navigate the Twitterverse?

The Fresh Expressions Minister

The church has its own emerging “professionals”: the Fresh Expression Ministers. This group of dedicated renewal experts are all too happy to come to your church and tell you that your tradition is wrong, that it doesn’t speak to the times and is irrelevant to today’s confusing post modern secular world.

The first thing to do is throw the font out with the bath water.

Your church needs to be gutted for liturgical renewal. The space needs to be flexible for the new rock/praise service you simply must do to attract young families.

The next thing is to empty out the endowments to pay for these projects to bring youth into the church. Build a skate park in the parking lot, and hand out bibles. Maybe take your church to a bar and talk about Jesus with the patrons.

The Fresh Expression Minister will show you flashy videos of churches that are casting off their tradition and heritage to attract new people into the building to consume a cathartic Sunday morning experience. Brief testimonials will be delivered by the new congregants about how relevant this new style of church is in their lives. You will swoon and before you and the rest of your leadership team knows it, you have been sold the new Fresh Expressions model of ministry.

Problem is, that is not Fresh Expressions; at least not according to the Fresh Expressions people.

Buyer Beware

Social Media is about community and the internet is a meritocracy. The best rise to the top and the betterment of the community as a whole is the goal of those who are truly invested in Social Media.

Whether the Internet lives up to this ideal or not, you can’t sell merit. Some Social Media Douchebags will try, but eventually the internet sees through the smoke and mirrors and calls out those that are less than honest.

This is also starting with the Fresh Expressions movement. The desire to make the Christian story relevant to a new generation is commendable, but not at the expense of the entire tradition. The theological grounding of the Anglican tradition simply can’t be represented by the Fresh Expressions movement in its Canadian incarnation. Fresh Expressions Canada has even partnered with the United Church of Canada to create a broader – and more diluted – base for it to sell it wares.

The theological principles and grounding of the original movement has been lost as the current leaders of the Canadian movement seek to find new “clients” to sell their liturgical innovations. The watering down of the “product” continues as entire centuries of tradition and prayer books are scuttled in favour feel-good liturgies and innovation. Eucharistic prayers are completely re-written without any thought to their sotoriological significance. The epiclesis is trashed, gutted or altered beyond recognition that we can no longer be sure if the Holy Spirit is descending or someone is passing gas.

Don’t get me wrong, as an ordained person who practices Fresh Expressions and whose partner works in the social media industry it is difficult to criticize movements that I see such possibility in, but I’m left wondering at times at the horrible hybrid that could be released upon the world if the Social Media Douchebag and the Fresh Expressions Minister were ever to join forces.

Simply put, it would be a match made in hell.

Genesis 4:1-16

October 18, 2010Marty 2 Comments

Cain Murders Abel

Now the man knew his wife Eve, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, ‘I have produced a man with the help of the Lord.’ Next she bore his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a tiller of the ground. In the course of time Cain brought to the Lord an offering of the fruit of the ground, and Abel for his part brought of the firstlings of his flock, their fat portions. And the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering, but for Cain and his offering he had no regard. So Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. The Lord said to Cain, ‘Why are you angry, and why has your countenance fallen? If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it.’

Cain said to his brother Abel, ‘Let us go out to the field.’ And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, ‘Where is your brother Abel?’ He said, ‘I do not know; am I my brother’s keeper?’ And the Lord said, ‘What have you done? Listen; your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground! And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. When you till the ground, it will no longer yield to you its strength; you will be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth.’ Cain said to the Lord, ‘My punishment is greater than I can bear! Today you have driven me away from the soil, and I shall be hidden from your face; I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and anyone who meets me may kill me.’ Then the Lord said to him, ‘Not so! Whoever kills Cain will suffer a sevenfold vengeance.’ And the Lord put a mark on Cain, so that no one who came upon him would kill him. Then Cain went away from the presence of the Lord, and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden.

O, beware, my lord, of jealousy;
It is the green-ey’d monster, which doth mock
The meat it feeds on. That cuckold lives in bliss,
Who, certain of his fate, loves not his wronger:
But O, what damnèd minutes tells he o’er
Who dotes, yet doubts, suspects, yet strongly loves!

Long before these famous words where penned by Shakespeare the author of Genesis spoke about jealously. And when that author spoke about jealousy, jealously doesn’t just mock, it kills.

We all try to please those we love and it hurts when we try our best and they choose another over us. This is the case for Cain, whose countenance falls (in other words, you could see the disappointment on his face).

But Cain allows the stain of jealousy to mark him and of course the stain of murder. But it is jealousy that leads Cain to murder. He gives into those dark feelings that all humans possess. He cannot control his dark side.

Cain’s punishment for jealousy and murder is to be a fugitive who wanders the earth; a person with no home. Cain is to be never welcomed by strangers and to always be alone in the world.

But to me the interesting part is this, God did not banish Cain. Cain left voluntarily. Cain went away from the presence of the Lord. And even though Cain walks away from God, God still puts a mark on Cain to protect him.

Jealousy may have gotten the better of Cain, but God advocates for justice out of his abundant love for Cain. Cain must be punished for his sin, but even though he is punished, he is still loved and protected by God.

Genesis 3

October 11, 2010Marty 4 Comments

The First Sin and Its Punishment

Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, ‘Did God say, “You shall not eat from any tree in the garden”?’ The woman said to the serpent, ‘We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; but God said, “You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, nor shall you touch it, or you shall die.” ’ But the serpent said to the woman, ‘You will not die; for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’ So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made loincloths for themselves.

They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. But the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, ‘Where are you?’ He said, ‘I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.’ He said, ‘Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?’ The man said, ‘The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree, and I ate.’ Then the Lord God said to the woman, ‘What is this that you have done?’ The woman said, ‘The serpent tricked me, and I ate.’ The Lord God said to the serpent,

‘Because you have done this,
cursed are you among all animals
and among all wild creatures;
upon your belly you shall go,
and dust you shall eat
all the days of your life.
I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will strike your head,
and you will strike his heel.’
To the woman he said,
‘I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children,
yet your desire shall be for your husband,
and he shall rule over you.’
And to the man he said,
‘Because you have listened to the voice of your wife,
and have eaten of the tree
about which I commanded you,
“You shall not eat of it”,
cursed is the ground because of you;
in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.
By the sweat of your face
you shall eat bread
until you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;
you are dust,
and to dust you shall return.’

The man named his wife Eve, because she was the mother of all who live. And the Lord God made garments of skins for the man and for his wife, and clothed them.

Then the Lord God said, ‘See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever’— therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. He drove out the man; and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim, and a sword flaming and turning to guard the way to the tree of life.

Image By Bryant Arnold

Growing up in the midst of the feminist revolution didn’t stop this story from being told to me at church and in popular society in a certain sexist manner.

The nobility of man, the servant of the Lord, who always did as he was asked without question was a theme stressed in the recounting of this tale. A noble savage indeed who would to this day, still be tilling the soil in the Garden of Eden if not for that temptress woman, that she-devil.

And woman, well she is a vixen, a creator of sin that convinces man to have at the “apple”. She must have used her feminine charms to seduce poor and noble man into committing the first sin. It was woman who was responsible for the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. She did it, she made us do it.

What an interesting telling of the tale.

And as I reflect upon this story and write this entry I am struck by how stupid, obliviously and without reason man is depicted in the story. Man cannot even think for himself. What an oaf. What a child…pointing to her and telling God like a child caught with his hand in the cookie jar that “she made me do it.”

And for centuries women have been blamed for our banishment from Eden. And why? Cause they offered us the forbidden fruit? Nothing is said, at least in popular religious culture that I have experienced, about the male sin. Yes the male sin, man said yes. He agreed.

Sure women offered the forbidden fruit, a sin. But man said yes, also a sin. And because man said yes, and women offered the forbidden fruit they were expelled from paradise. Man was forced to labour and woman was to suffer pain in child-birth.

What a minute…is this story about sex? Uh, who would have thought.

Genesis 2:4b-25

September 27, 2010Marty 1 Comment

In the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, when no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up—for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was no one to till the ground; but a stream would rise from the earth, and water the whole face of the ground— then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being. And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east; and there he put the man whom he had formed. Out of the ground the Lord God made to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food, the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.’ So out of the ground the LordGod formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every animal of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper as his partner.So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh.And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said,
‘This at last is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
this one shall be called Woman,
for out of Man this one was taken.’
Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed.

A river flows out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it divides and becomes four branches. The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one that flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;and the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there.The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one that flows around the whole land of Cush. The name of the third river is Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.’

This passage comes from the J source, which is the oldest source in the Pentateuch, dating to approximately 950 BCE.

This is a very interesting passage for many reasons; the most notable is that it offers another account of creation. It doesn’t just pick the story up from where we left off in Genesis 1, where God was resting after speaking creation into existence.

In this passage God had already created the heavens and the earth, and as of yet He hasn’t created any kind of plant, nor has He caused it to rain, since there was little point since there was no one to till the ground. Before plant and before animal the first thing God formed from the dust of the earth was man. This is obviously very different from the first account of creation.

Then the Lord God planted a garden and placed man in it. God made every tree grow out of the ground including the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God then commanded man to till the ground but not to eat of the tree of Knowledge of good and evil.

God then creates the animals for man, but man still needs a partner. So God caused man to fall asleep and then He operates on him, removing a rib and using that rib to create woman.

Aside from this being the second account of creation, notice the differences. First the order of creation is different. Man is created first and not last. Notice also that God doesn’t speak things into existence, He plants, He operates, He breathes. God is depicted as being anthropomorphic.

This is very different from the creator God of Genesis 1. This is a tangible God, a God that walks about in the Garden of Eden. This is a physical God, a God of substance. And I think the type of God that Christ called Abba.

And finally in verse 24 there is a little treaty about how man should cling to his wife after leaving his mother and father. Now this is really out of place. How can man leave his mother and father if there is only one man and one woman? There are no parents to leave yet.

Definitely odd indeed, unless this story is being used to explain the origins of the family unit, of sexuality and of an agrarian lifestyle?

All of that aside, I find this story striking for the obvious reason; there are two different accounts of creation. And since both are part of Holy Scripture and they seem to contradict each other, then perhaps we are not to accept these stories as factual or scientific and instead we are to see them as mythical stories about God that tell us a truth. Now whether that is a theological truth, metaphorical truth, allegorical truth, revelatory truth, etc. requires a lifetime of study, which I would certainly encourage.

But this opens us to an interesting thought and a debate that is hotly contested. Is the bible inherent truth? Is it historical? Is it an accurate account of the creation of the world, science and big bang aside?

We are two pages in, two chapters into our exploration of sacred scripture and already the looming question as presented itself…if some of the bible is just stories that tell a truth, how do we distinguish from factual truth and the other forms of truth?

I wish I had an answer right now, but alas I don’t. Hopefully scripture will glean us an answer as we continue…

The Lost Art of Discernment

September 23, 2010Marty 1 Comment

The deployment of human resources in a large institution like the Anglican Church of Canada can be extremely difficult. In many ways the church, like any institution, sends new recruits out to smaller postings until they have obtained an adequate amount of experience and seniority. It is at that time that clergy begin the journey back to cities and larger parishes.

In conjunction with this traditional practice is the assumption that clergy are not supposed to stay in one place for too long. Most clergy spend 5-10 years at a posting before being moved along to another parish. I have heard many reasons for this, but none have ever struck me as particular valid or insightful.

In both cases the career track of the clergy seems to take precedence and be more important than an exercise in discernment. In many ways the clergy of the church are on a journey to Tarshish.

“I have done all I can do here, put my programs in place, it is time to move on.”

“I have been here for 5 years (or ten or fifteen for that matter), I need a change of scenery, new challenges and a better parish.”

“I see my time here as temporary. I’m planning to move soon.”

What is common amongst the above example is the amount of “I” statements, which I find to be incredibly ironic since we are called by God to serve. Caught in the western consumer mindset we have forgotten what vocational holiness looks like and instead have centered our call on a career in the church.

Would it not be better to ponder whether God has called us to that little country parish instead of a big city parish, or He wants us to stay in one place for 20 years because we may have done all we want, but we haven’t yet accomplished what God wants from us in that place?

It may not be pretty and it certainly is not easy, but vocational discernment is a necessity for ordained ministry. We go where we are called, whether that is Tarshish or Nineveh.

As a side note, a truly great book on discerning vocational holiness is “Under the Unpredictable Plant”, by Eugene Peterson.

Diocesan Web Strategy

September 19, 2010Marty 1 Comment

Diocese of Huron Web Strategy

Prepared by: Rev’d Marty Levesque

August 1st, 2010

Rationale

Web presence is a vital component to the success of any company or organization. As today’s society uses the web to research businesses and organizations before even stepping foot in the door, first impressions are made online more than ever. For churches, the internet has become an increasingly common first moment of contact and the first opportunity of evangelism. The critical power of the first impression means that we must be just as conscious of what a website says about us as we do about the quality of our buildings and services.

Currently, the Diocese of Huron does not have a web strategy to ensure the quality and content of its parish websites. Each parish constructs its own web presence as it deems necessary and many have no presence at all. As a consequence, there is a huge inconsistency in the way the diocese is presented online. Some parish websites are well put together and informative, some are built by well-intentioned clergy or parishioners with little understanding for online conventions, accessibility or cross-browser compatibility, and some look to have been designed well over 10 years ago and are no longer current or fashionable.

The development and implementation of a diocesan web strategy will ensure that every parish has a professional web presence that meet a set of quality, accessibility and messaging standards. This plan will benefit the diocese in the following areas.

Diocesan Culture

Consistent messaging can create an outwardly-facing diocesan culture to help fight against the rise of congregationalism and re-enforce the Anglican culture. Every church in the diocese would have a web page with the same feel and standards of content while still allowing for individuality through customizable layouts and designs.

Response to changing needs

A standardize and centralized content management system will enable rapid creation of internal and external websites as needed. Websites for deaneries, special-initiatives and groups such as the ACW and Huron Church Camp could develop a greater sense of community within all of these structures and foster both internal and external communication for them

Communication and Outreach

Implementing a unified web strategy paves the road for a more centralized communication approach from the dioceses. By creating a web presence strategy, the stage is set for future diocesan communications initiatives such as a possible social media strategy.

Accessibility

While “508 web accessibility” is not law in Canada, it is an American law which has become the industry standard of web site design and development. 508 allows for screen readers and “search bots” to access the information on the screen for web readers for the visually impaired and to maximize analytic information for search engines. A professionally developed and designed site would take these into account and ensure that our websites are as accessible as our front doors.

Professionalism and consistency

Web address and e-mail address for all diocesan employees will create a branding effect and a more professional web presence. Every church web address would end in diohuron.org – e.g. stgeorgeslondon.diohuron.org and every individual upon entering the diocese would be assigned an e-mail address – e.g. martylevesque@diohuron.org. This also allows for consistent communication throughout the diocese as church house does not need to update e-mail list each time clergy move from parish to parish, or switches services providers.

How and How Much?

The Diocese of Huron web strategy would be implemented by a local IT company in conjunction with a communications representative from the diocese of Huron. A framework for all diocesan sites would be built using a content management system that will allow for the creation of each parish website. Technically this means that one main website would be created for the entire diocese, and each parish would have its own child website created from the same mould. Ideally there will be a number of choices for each site regarding functionality, visual design and layout that will allow each parish to customize their site within the given parameters.

Using a centralized content management system has the potential to decrease costs significantly. The average cost for the design and development of a professional site for an organization is $3000-5000. If each of the 80 parishes in the diocese were to contract for the production of a professional quality website the cost would be approximately $250 000-400 000.

In addition, the average cost of domain names is $15 per year. Hosting services have a vast range is price, but an average plan for the storage capabilities of an average parish is $7 a month (this does not include additional storage requirements for podcast casting or video casting). Therefore each parish with a website and domain name is paying approximately $100 a year on web presence, at the very least.

The use of WordPress multi user sites or a content management system would drop the cost of initial development to 15-25 000 and the average maintenance and upgrade cost to approximately $50/year. An overall reduction of over 80% initially and 50% on an ongoing basis.

If each parish in the diocese were to pool their resources and each parish contribute $100 per year to the diocese web strategy, $8000 per year would be raised. Since the cost to design and develop a multi user site would be approximately 15- 25 000, the Diocese of Huron would sign 2 or 3 year contract with a local IT company, amortizing the cost over a 2 or 3 year period.

This web strategy would continue past the original development stage and parishes would be asked to continue to support the project each and every year as maintenance costs would need be taken into account, the development of new plug ins as they become available and the development of new skins for a fresh appearance are continually developed.

Execution

Three quotes would be sought from local companies and a decision would be made as to which company the diocese would use to implement this project.

A central person would be designated as the liaison between the IT company and the individual churches. This would allow for smooth communication between the company and the diocese and not over load the IT company with “80 clients” calling about their individual needs.

A training manual will be developed so that clergy, wardens or laity would be able to simply and effectively “design” their individual parishes’ websites from the choices of skins, color schemes and available plug ins.

Furthermore the centralized person would also be designated to provide deanery training sessions and help facilitate the development of the individual websites on the multi user platform and educate local clergy in the operation of the system.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this web strategy contained within this document is only a skeletal framework for a direction forward into the World Wide Web. It is both efficient and cost effective. It allows the diocese as a whole to raise its digital presence to a professional level that allows for effective communication and evangelism.

To demonstrate the need to implement this web strategy a brief website analyses could be conducted of randomly chosen parishes in each deanery. A complete website analysis of each parish in the diocese is beyond the scope of this and future reports. Therefore it was determined that a sampling would suffice. One website from each deanery will be randomly selected and tested for code errors that may cause it to improperly render on various browsers or indicate future maintenance issues. As well during the testing it will be determined whether the current websites are 508 accessible for those suffering from disabilities. Given the importance we have placed on making our buildings accessible, it is the opinion of the writer of this report that our websites should also be equally accessible.

If this initial report is accepted and the wish of the Bishops to proceed forward then a technical analyses will then be conducted as out lined above.

Genesis 1:1-2:4

September 19, 2010Marty 4 Comments

Being raised in a scientific age and having attended secular institutions until my formation in seminary I have always struggled with creation Ex nihilo. There was nothing and then God spoke and creation came into existence. A creator God, as depicted here, is a very distant God, one who breathes life into the world and then sits back and watches from a distance. This is definitely Aristotle’s clock maker God, the prime mover; definitely not the close personal God that Christ refers to as Abba.

This passage, also, is from the P source in the Pentateuch and as we will see later it is but the first (really the second, but that is another story) story about creation. In case you are new to biblical studies, much like myself in many ways, there are four sources of material in the Pentateuch, the first five books of the bible. They are J, E, P and D. Each of the sources are from different time periods, J being the oldest and P the newest.

Scholars generally agree that the reason that this passage was edited into Genesis was to provide scripturally-based reason as to why the Sabbath must be observed. Since during the act of creation, God rested and blessed that day to make it holy, there is scriptural reason for Sabbath observance.

All that being said, there are a few things that strike me on which I want to focus.

In verse 26 when God creates humankind, he does so by saying “let us make humankind…”

Is this a royal we? Or are there others with God? Later in verse 27, God returns to speaking in the singular. Where did they go?

Another point of interest is verse 1 of chapter 1 and verse 1 of chapter 2. In each case heavens is referred to in the plurals. Is there more than 1 heaven or is this a reference to the stars of the sky?

And something I have always struggled with, why would God give dominion over all the earth over to humankind? After all the effort to create, well everything, why relinquish control to humankind? I mean, surely God must have known the ecological disaster that a decision like that would eventually cause? I think as we go through the rest of the bible we will eventually return to this theme of land. Perhaps this is the beginning of the development of a theology of land?

To be honest there is much more in this passage and many more questions, but to ask every question and attempt to answer each would be an endeavour that is well beyond my skill. We have, after all, just begun to scratch the surface and I am sure some of these questions will return to us as we continue through the bible. For now though, this should suffice to whet my appetite.

Why Blog the Bible

September 18, 2010Marty 3 Comments

Have you ever read the bible cover to cover? Many people attempt this and it is easily done in a year. However I am afraid my endeavour will take a little longer than that.

The goal of the exercise is to not only familiarize myself better with the sacred scriptures, but also to get a better understanding of why we can’t touch the dead skin of a pig, or in what type of fish Jonah spent three days.

The bible is filled with many wondrous and bizarre stories. Sometimes comical, sometimes insightful and sometimes downright weird, my reflections on the bible, its stories and characters is one man’s attempt to gain a better understanding into the divine and how and why the divine operates in this world.

What is your because?

September 17, 2010Marty 1 Comment

When was the last time you spontaneously tried a restaurant? No recommendation from a friend or even a review – you just saw a sign and said what the heck, let’s give that a try?

If you are like me, cold calls to restaurants are not high on the priority list. We often base our decision to go to a new restaurant because “we heard it was good” from a friend or colleague, or it received great reviews.

That being the case then why do we expect people to simply walk into our churches because we have a pithy quote on our sign and have painted our doors red? True, we will, on the odd occasion, have a cold call from a seeker, but these occurrences are far from the norm.

What’s far more common is a friend or colleague recommending their church to you, just like a restaurant. They do so because they know why they love their church, and they can articulate exactly what their church does well and what they particularly enjoy. It could be a good youth group, a strong music program or maybe their preacher is fantastic at liturgy and always provides inspiring and relevant sermons.

Whatever the reason is, if parishioners know exactly why their church is the best they will be willing to share their feelings with friends or colleagues.

So my question then is this: why would someone come to your church? What is your because?

Can you or your parishioners finish this statement quickly and concisely…

“You should come to my church, St Switham’s by the Swamp, because…”

If you or your parishioners can’t finish this statement to briefly and effectively describe your church, is it any wonder that few new people darkening it’s the doors? If people aren’t walking out on Sundays excited to share their experience with a friend, then why would we expect hundreds of people to flock to our churches on “bring a friend” Sunday or “back to church” Sundays?

The best and oldest form of evangelism is still our parishioner’s social networks. But to leverage these networks we must first inspire them, educate them and then give them permission to go out into the world and tell people that their church is the best because…

Are fonts a big deal?

September 8, 2010Marty 2 Comments

When choosing a font for church publications it is important to remember that your choice of font says much about you and your level of professionalism. There are, after all, fonts appropriate for every job and every situation.

Far too many churches and pastors, although, do not take the time to properly choose fonts for their publications and instead rely upon their personal favorite.

An example of this that occurs far too often is the choice to use Comic Sans in all church publications. Most pastors do not realize that Comic Sans was originally created as a casual script typeface that was modeled on the fonts used in American comic books for several decades. The purpose of the new font was to replace Times New Roman in the word balloons of cartoon characters in the beta version of Microsoft Bob.

So what? The font is meant to symbolize fun and youthfulness. An impression most pastors want to convey to the world in hopes of luring in new congregants and growing their churches.

Yet, using a font designed to emulate a comic book font does say something about your church. It says we are youthful and childish, which is perfectly appropriate for children’s ministries and Sunday school. But is it really appropriate for a wedding or funeral, or for the bulletin were the sacrament of the Eucharist is about to be celebrated?

What message are we trying to convey to the world when we use Comic Sans for a Eucharistic bulletin? Is the sacrifice of Christ childish and fun? Is it meant to represent playfulness of God in the redemption of the world? I am going to go out on a limb and say, probably not.

Pastors need to take the same time and dedication to font choices that they do for choice of vestments or liturgical space. Each of these choices says something about us, our churches and how we view ministry.

Expressions in Chalk

August 3, 2010Marty 1 Comment

This past weekend my wife and I attended http://www.imadon.org/

I joined hundreds of people who walked by and watched art in progress as various artist in various categories competed with each other. People from all walks of life took time out of their weekend to go to Wortley village and join in the experience. I meet dozens of people, young families, artist, bikers and such. The entire mosaic that is London was out in full force.

But the greatest part of the experience for me was the involvement of the Anglican Church. The previous years exhibition had always been held downtown, right by the JLC http://www.johnlabattcentre.com/ This year though St James Westminster http://www.saintjameswestminster.ca/main.php hosted the event in their parking lot.

What an incredible and simple way to reach out to hundreds of people, to let them know where the local church is and who we are. A truly unique, impressive and simple action of hospitality managed to also be an incredible act of outreach and evangelism.

Could it have been better? Perhaps…a bbq selling hotdogs and hamburgers, free water and music all day long would have helped. Opening the church proper to allow access to washrooms could have been a good gesture. But regardless of what could have been, it was still rather impressive and a joy to witness.

Was anyone converted that day? Probably not, but hundreds of people will remember where St James is and how they hosted a civic event.

A seed planted.

How I became friends with a brick.

July 6, 2010Marty 1 Comment

When it comes to social media trends, I’m comfortably in the middle of the early majority crowd. I don’t use every new tool, but I enjoy finding the right one for the right job.

I’m not an expert when it comes to the ‘proper’ use of social media either. I’m not sure such a thing exists. Some people tell me that there’s no wrong way to use Twitter or Facebook. Yet some are deeply offended to see a locked Twitter feed or anything on Myspace.

We all know the social rules in our own offline contexts. I wonder how the congregation would respond if a newcomer started cheering my entrance this Sunday with an Arsenio Hall fist pump.

Of course, social rules can be challenged and changed. But this isn’t usually done from the outside or the new adopter. The cheering newcomer would be quietly pulled aside and educated about how to properly behave during the service (if such a thing also existed). Meanwhile a long-term member might, just might, be able to start the wave.

As social media and “web 2.0” is finally reaching the late majority and laggards, churches are finally climbing on board.

The social web is a powerful tool unlike any that have been available to us before. It’s an opportunity to engage with social networks 24/7. It’s an easy way to reach people that have never considered stepping foot in our doors. And we are running right at them, fists pumping and voices whooping.

Don’t get me wrong, I love my church, I even love the building, but I have never been “friends” with a building. A building and I don’t hang out and have beers or talk hockey. Having a building tell me what event is coming up inside of it seems a little unnerving to me.

Organizations have also started becoming friends with me. I am friends with many people in the men’s group – but I’m not sure how to be friends with a collective or if I want to…

These might seem trivial complaints, but they’re just small examples of how we, as the church, can look silly by failing to consider the accepted social conventions.

Facebook has tools for groups and organizations to engage in a meaningful and comfortable way with the x.x millions of members that are familiar with the conventions and rules of that network.

I’m using Facebook as an example because it seems to be the most commonly adopted social-media tool by churches.

But this is a concern for any new social context, online or offline.

When we enter into a new community without first learning about its acceptable social conventions, we risk making a bad impression.

We reveal our ignorance and risk appearing arrogant and indifferent to it. We think we are saying that we are cool and connected but others hear that we are out of date and out of touch. We are the ones pumping our fists and whooping at the sermon and are surprised when nobody wants to join us for coffee afterward.

When we use new tools to engage with people, we have a tremendous opportunity to connect with new people in new ways and spread the Good News of Jesus Christ. But if we don’t do it with respect and awareness for the social conventions of the community we enter, we can only hope someone will gently pull us aside and inform us of the rules before we become the butt of the joke.

To that end here are a few places to start and learn about the most popular social media tools and how you can use them for your church or organization to help make your journey into web 2.0 a little more seamless.

http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=324706977130

http://mashable.com/2010/03/24/brand-facebook-now/

http://business.twitter.com/twitter101/best_practices

http://mashable.com/2010/06/22/linkedin-groups-2/

Nuit Blanche

June 21, 2010Marty 1 Comment

For those unfamiliar with Nuit Blanche you will have to wait another year to experience local artist taking over the night. If you are interested in finding out what you missed though, check it out here http://www.nuitblanchelondon.ca/

Street theater in alley ways, parking lot performances and night club galleries is the bohemian experience that Nuit Blanche is for one night. In a few cases you become the model and eventually the artist will use you in social commentary.

Live art is more than stepping back passively to experience a piece being created. Part of you can be drawn into the creative vortex of the artist and your energy inspires the artist to continue to create in the moment, a Rite of Spring so to speak; a rebirth.

As we walked back to our car from downtown we passed the empty and dark Cathedral. I began to envision some of the performances on the lawn, or better yet, the doors of the cathedral church opened wide on a Saturday night for hundreds of visitors to walk in, experience art in progress and be welcomed into our church building.

I am sure of the hundreds of people that attended Nuit Blanche many have never set foot in a church, let alone our church. What a great opportunity for evangelism, outreach and welcoming another community into our midst. What a great opportunity it would be to use our facilities to help another community within the city. What a wonderful chance to open our doors and say come in.

I move on from the closed doors and the dark lawn and continue walking on Richmond Street wondering what could be next year at Nuit Blanche and I felt hope and a sense of possibility.

Why is the church dying?

June 19, 2010Marty 3 Comments

Today I attended Change Camp at Museum London. Change Camp is a un-conference, which means instead of a speaker or a scripted event, the day is allowed to unfold naturally and is only loosely guided by facilitators. In many ways it is a lot like a visioning day, where a church community comes together to envision what they want their community to look like and decide how to get there.

As I sat through the day, participating with the larger community of London to develop and learn to care for its citizens – especially the weakest among us – I was struck by something that I found odd at first and then later by something that upset me.

Let’s start with the odd.

During the day, I looked at all the people that had come together from diverse lives to help their fellow human beings and to shape their community into a healthy and vibrant city. I looked around and it hit me: why am I the ONLY clergy here?

I listened to a group of people that wanted change in their lives and their city. I listened to people that want their neighborhoods to be safe, healthy and prosperous places. These people had given up on their elected officials doing something to improve their city, and they had most certainly given up on the church. So they got together to fix the problem and they did so without us.

Then came the angry.

In the afternoon, I sat with three city councilors as they identified all the necessary parties that would need to come together to discuss development in our city. They identified citizen-led and driven community groups (like the SOHO Community organization), developers and government as key players. Notably absent from the discussion was the church.

Three city councilors, discussing stakeholders in the health and sustainability of their communities and the church didn’t even cross their minds.

Why? Why would it? Clergy, and the church at large, are often visibly absent from political or public meetings for the development of the communities and cities they serve. So why involve the church now? Why ask for their participation?

We stopped participating in any kind of public event long ago. We stopped speaking to the face of power many years ago. We have been totally marginalized. Worse yet, we have done it to ourselves. We have accepted it, shrugged our shoulders, and stayed home to complain about days gone by when we used to have a strong voice in our communities.

Long gone are the days when the clergy would show up to public meetings, give a voice to the marginalized, the weak and the poor. We have retreated so far from public life that now public life has forgotten us. We have ceased to matter and will continue to not matter as long as we pass up opportunities like Change Camp to participate civilly and publically in our communities.

We have retreated so deep into our churches that we have become obsolete.

When we talk about a better world from the pulpit, when we preach social justice and then fail to show at events designed specifically to foster dialogue between citizens, organizations and government to make our communities better, we become nothing less than hypocrites. We lack authenticity.

And that, my friends, is why the church is dying.

LJ-Thank you, Thank You Very Much

April 28, 2005Marty Leave a comment

I was just compared to Johnny Bravo….I am so entertained. As long as it is not the episode where he gets turned into a hot girl and goes all drag queen, then I am all good 😉

This makes me want to take a poll. What cartoon character best describes me? Or better yet, best describes you? Remember the good ole days when Saturday mornings was 7 hours of none stop cartoons? Aww, I am getting all nostalgic for my sandbox and my Tonka trucks and hours of mindless entertainment with no responsibility. (And yes I know, that was last year for yours truly :P)

~amused

LJ-Any Takers?

October 7, 2004Marty Leave a comment

What is a hero? What makes him/her a hero. What are the characteristics of the hero archetype?

Who is your hero?

LJ-Untitled

May 24, 2004Marty Leave a comment

It bugs my shit that after all this time, I can still be defined by past events. 20+ years after the fact and still I find nature has more of a profound effect on my actions than rational thought or reason seems to.

I accepted some of my motivations for some actions coming from the past along time ago. I told myself that since they were leading to moral goodness or that they are societally considered “good” then it was alright. I know see that if I truly wish to break from my past then I have to do it in all aspects of my life or it means nothing.

On a lighter note, I am finding the Republic by Plato to be more of a difficult read than some of his other works. I just keep sitting here going, alright, get to the point, stop playing word games, I get the point. A lot of it seems tedious to me. Discussing it though, I had a great conversation with my best mate in Germany about the book, specifically about book 10 and some of the overriding themes he is driving at.

I only have a few weeks of studying the Republic, so I should enjoy it more. Maybe I am to bias, for I am much more of an Aristilian and find that Plato and neo-platonist bother me. I will be on Augustine in no time, and into Cristian values and ethics shortly so I should stop and appreciate it more I think.

Other than that I am reading this book “How the Scots Invented the Modern World”. Needless to say, it has its use in bothering the hell out of British roommate, other than that, the arguments are quite weak and the logic leading. I will see if it improves, but up to this point, I think the author is a bit of a ummm….wanker??? Would that be a good word for it? I think it fits.

That’s all for now, time to go meditate and enjoy some quiet introspection.

LJ-Gentle Reminders

May 20, 2004Marty Leave a comment

Note to self, Plato and Hobbs don’t mix, do not study them again on the same day or your brain will hurt afterwards.

Rogue Preacher

Caught between two cities

Menu

Widgets

Search

Author: Marty

Genesis 8:1-19

Genesis 7

Genesis 6:9-22

Genesis 6:1-8

Genesis Chapter 5

Genesis 4:17-26

Genesis 4:1-16

Genesis 3

The First Sin and Its Punishment

Genesis 2:4b-25

The Lost Art of Discernment

Diocesan Web Strategy

Rationale

Diocesan Culture

Response to changing needs

Communication and Outreach

Accessibility

Professionalism and consistency

How and How Much?

Execution

Conclusion

Genesis 1:1-2:4

Why Blog the Bible

What is your because?

Are fonts a big deal?

Expressions in Chalk

Nuit Blanche

Why is the church dying?

LJ-Thank you, Thank You Very Much

LJ-Any Takers?

LJ-Untitled

LJ-Gentle Reminders