I'm fascinated by the creative process and to music in particular. There are only so many notes and so many words to compose songs and only so many instruments on which to play them, and yet, each year there are millions of new songs. I've been blessed to have transitioned from one job to another this year, but both have allowed me time to listen to other people's creative work while I do mine. Here is the music I heard and liked the most this year...
Top Ten Albums of 2012 (alphabetical order)
Alabama Shakes - Boys & Girls
Andrew Bird - Break It Yourself / Hands of Glory
Bill Fay - Life is People
Electric Guest - Mondo
Macklemore - The Heist
Sean Rowe - The Salesman and the Shark
The Avett Brothers - The Carpenter
The Walkmen - Heaven
The Whigs - Enjoy the Company
Tiny Victories - Those of Us Still Alive
Favorite New Band Discoveries That Aren't New Bands:
Morcheeba - despite the name, not a reggae band
Bill Fay - read this guy's story, it's great
Peter Broderick - peaceful, beautiful music
The Rest of the Best
Allo Darlin' - Europe
Audra Mae & The Almight Sound - s/t
Bad Books - II
Bahamas - Barchords
Cardinal - Hymns
Chad Valley - Equatorical Ultravox EP
Cody Chesnutt - Landing on a Hundred
Communist Daughter - Lions & Lambs EP
Dan Deacon - America
Dana Buoy - Summer Bodies
Diamond Rings - Free Dimensional
Dirty Projectors - Swing Lo Magellan
Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros - Here
Emeralds - Does It Look Like I'm Here?
Family of the Year - Loma
Field Report - s/t
Gold Motel - s/t
Gotye - Making Mirrors (minus that one song I used to know)
Harlan - Native Son EP
Jack Robert Hardman - s/t
Japandroids - Celebration Rock
Jason Lytle - Dept. of Disappearance
Johnny Flynn - A Bag of Hammers
Jonathan Boulet - We Keep the Best...
Jones Street Station - The Understanding EP
Jukebox the Ghost - Safe Travels
King Creosote & Jon Hopkins - Diamond Mine Jubilee Edition
Kishi Bashi - 151a
Lianne La Havas - Is Your Love Big Enough?
Lord Huron - Lonesome Dreams
Max and the Moon - The Way I See EP
Menomena - Moms
Mogwai - A Wrenched Virile Lore
Mumford & Sons - Babel
Mystery Jets - Radlands
Of Monsters and Men - My Head is An Animal
OMBRE - Believe You Me
Patrick Watson - Adventures in Your Own Backyard
Passion Pit - Gossamer
Paul Banks - Banks
Peter Broderick - It Starts Hear
Port St. Willow - Holiday
Richard Walters - Regret Less
Sam Billen - Places
Sam Lee - Ground of Its Own
School of Seven Bells - Put Your Sad Down
Sea Wolf - Old World Romance
SoloS - Beast of Both Worlds
Spiritualized - Sweet Heart Sweet Light
Sun Kil Moon - Among the Leaves
Tame Impala - Lonerism
The Amazing - Gentle Stream
The Antlers - Undersea
The Lumineers - s/t
The Maccabees - Given to the Wild
The Mountain Goats - Transcendental Youth
The Plastics Revolution - King Bono cs Lost Flight Simulators
Toro Y Moi - June 2009
Wanderlist - Record Time
Woods - Bend Beyond
Yuna - s/t
Top Songs of 2012
Deadmau5 -The Veldt
Patrick Watson - Lighthouse
Perfume Genius - Normal Song
Field Report - Fergus Falls
Bahamas - Okay Alright I'm Alive
Jones Street Station - Grace
The Walkmen - We Can't Be Beat
Cody Chesnutt - Till I Met Thee
Bill Fay - This World
Atom for Peace - Default
SoloS - All My Tribulations
The Raveonettes - Into the Night
Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros - Man on Fire
Spiritualized - Hey Jane
King Charles - The Brightest Lights
Max and the Moon - Out of My Head
Imagine Dragons - On Top of the World
Passion Pit - Carried Away
Django Django - Default
The New Division - Start Over
Electric Guest - This Head I Hold
Kishi Bashi - Bright Whites
Tiny Victories - Gravitron
Audra Mae & The Almighty Sound - Jebediah Moonshine's Friday Night Shack Party
Zeus - Are You Gonna Waste My Time?
The Avett Brothers - Live and Die
Mumford & Sons - I Will Wait
Alabama Shakes - Hold On
Black Prarie - Rock of Ages
Johnny Flynn - I Don't Wanna Go
Sean Rowe - Horses
The Lumineers - Big Parade
King Tuff - Anthem
Japandroids - Continuous Thunder
Frank Ocean - Thinkin Bout You
Macklemore - Same Love
contemplate
simple thoughts
Monday, December 24, 2012
Wednesday, November 02, 2011
Re-
I have found great comfort lately in considering the deep grammar behind the word redemption. Put simply, for something to be redeemed, the implication is that it was at one time deemed. This pattern follows with God's history, as He one-ups himself in profound ways. In the beginning, God created. Now, through the revelation of Jesus as Lord and Savior, he recreates. In the beginning, God deemed of His creation - "it is good." Now, he redeems. Through Christ, creation is once again made "good."
Friday, September 30, 2011
Lucky Guy
I am so very happy to be married to my wife. Last night, we were relaxing on the couch, finishing up an episode of Parks and Rec, when she stops and said something profound. I'd like to repost the general sentiment here:
Maybe people are naturally legalistic. It seems like no matter how hard we try, we just exhibit this need for something that we can co-opt and use to define our lives. People can reject "religion" and embrace "spirituality" but then they just become religious about being spiritual.
Wow. What a smart woman! And all I was thinking about was how much fun it would be to work at 720 Entertainment.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
On Discipleship
Here's a recent email conversation I had with a friend of mine:
ME: Is discipleship really that important or is it just the next buzzword in Christian circles?
HIM: Oh I don't know. Following Jesus. Becoming like Jesus. Go and make disciples of all nations. Probably not.
ME: No, seriously. Defend it to me. It's all I hear these days (slight exaggeration). Why is "discipleship" THE word?
HIM: It is probably the next word in the line of: spiritual growth, adult education, spiritual formation, now discipleship. I like the latest iteration/trend because the focus is more holistic: relationship with God, Christian community, my own formation + the world, rather than truncated to individual development.
ME: That makes me feel better. "Latest iteration" makes me feel less skeptical than "the next new thing" because it's really just the old thing. Do I have your permission to substitute spiritual formation for discipleship?
HIM: Sure!
ME: Sweet. Spiritual formation it is. I'm vintage.
I'm experiencing a new Christian context in Memphis as a result of joining a church that does not have an established denominational tradition. It's a church plant for most intents and purposes, and, as such, is much more autonomous than the heritage in which I grew up. One of the interesting things about participating in this new Christian subculture is that I'm not as in tune with the various movements swirling through the collective consciousness of the church as I had been. Before, I was always keenly aware of what trends were shaping the direction of the church. In this new environment, I'm definitely more on the outside looking in. So when I started hearing a lot of talk about discipleship, I wasn't sure where exactly it was coming from or just how prevalent it was.
Now, it seems to me that discipleship is one of the prevailing winds of change driving the ship called American Christianity. In meteorological terms, early indications are that we may need to upgrade Tropical Storm Discipleship to a Hurricane. All across the country, I'm seeing tweets and posts and articles and journals and conferences and local churches espousing the value and benefit of discipleship rediscovered and reinvigorated. It's an exciting development and a fantastic direction for the church. I would even argue that it's a necessary direction for the church to move. It's necessary for survival - to thwart both the constant temptation of the world and the latent complacency from which the church has suffered in recent history. As always, in order to continue living, the church needs a revival and, to be sure, discipleship may very well be THE form through which new life will invigorate (really, re-invigorate) the church of God in America.
But, here is what concerns me with this latest iteration: discipleship is not and cannot bring revival.
It is a fundamental and simple (but not trite) truth that new life comes only from God. No iteration of Christian faith - from the earliest Christian communities in Jerusalem and Antioch, to the martyrs, to the desert fathers, to the reformers, the great fathers of modern missions, to the revivalists of the Great Awakening, to the contemporary discipleship movement - has ever been able to manufacture any kind of sustainable life within the church. Rather, in each case, it was the holy and active Spirit of God that brought new life, which in turn spawned the earliest Christian communities, the martyrs, the reformers and revivalists, the modern disciples.
Perhaps the simplicity of this idea about the Spirit bringing revival has made it too hard to maintain with any consistency. But, the truth is that discipleship does not bring revival; revival brings discipleship.
(Note: I don't even know if I can explain this coherently, or do this Gospel-idea any justice with the application of mere human thought expressed in mere human words. But I'm going to try! Be gracious. This is an idea in progress. Be warned. It's about to get deep, or at least confusing.)
It seems to me that the simplest way to explain it is to say that things work out best when God acts and we react. Humans are fantastic reactionary beings. One might even argue that we were created to react. Think about it this way: the Creator acts and creation reacts. One of the fundamental Christian beliefs is that humans were created for community and relationship as opposed to isolation and separation. What is a relationship if not a series of reactions? Given this, it seems that creation creates chaos when creation tries to act, as opposed to reacting to the Creator.
As a principle for human living, I think that sounds... promising. But what about as an actual practice for human living? As a test case, how might this principle apply to the very beginning of the spiritual life, broadly defined as salvation? Again, the principle is that chaos ensues when the created acts rather than reacts to the Creator.
The very idea of salvation is rooted in the idea that chaos (in salvific terms, sin) is rooted in the actions of humanity and that it would take, literally, an act of God to fix the problem. Ironically, ever since that act of God (read: Jesus Christ), Christian history shows that the church has repeatedly had to address human attempts to reclaim salvation as something attained through human action. That may be too complicated. More simply, ever since Christ, the church - from Paul to the present - has had to fight to ensure that salvation was defined solely in terms of God acting and humans reacting. That is, there is no action through which humanity can save itself from the mess it has created. Salvation is fundamentally about what God has done and our only proper response is to react to what he has done. So far, so good.
ME: Is discipleship really that important or is it just the next buzzword in Christian circles?
HIM: Oh I don't know. Following Jesus. Becoming like Jesus. Go and make disciples of all nations. Probably not.
ME: No, seriously. Defend it to me. It's all I hear these days (slight exaggeration). Why is "discipleship" THE word?
HIM: It is probably the next word in the line of: spiritual growth, adult education, spiritual formation, now discipleship. I like the latest iteration/trend because the focus is more holistic: relationship with God, Christian community, my own formation + the world, rather than truncated to individual development.
ME: That makes me feel better. "Latest iteration" makes me feel less skeptical than "the next new thing" because it's really just the old thing. Do I have your permission to substitute spiritual formation for discipleship?
HIM: Sure!
ME: Sweet. Spiritual formation it is. I'm vintage.
****
I'm experiencing a new Christian context in Memphis as a result of joining a church that does not have an established denominational tradition. It's a church plant for most intents and purposes, and, as such, is much more autonomous than the heritage in which I grew up. One of the interesting things about participating in this new Christian subculture is that I'm not as in tune with the various movements swirling through the collective consciousness of the church as I had been. Before, I was always keenly aware of what trends were shaping the direction of the church. In this new environment, I'm definitely more on the outside looking in. So when I started hearing a lot of talk about discipleship, I wasn't sure where exactly it was coming from or just how prevalent it was.
Now, it seems to me that discipleship is one of the prevailing winds of change driving the ship called American Christianity. In meteorological terms, early indications are that we may need to upgrade Tropical Storm Discipleship to a Hurricane. All across the country, I'm seeing tweets and posts and articles and journals and conferences and local churches espousing the value and benefit of discipleship rediscovered and reinvigorated. It's an exciting development and a fantastic direction for the church. I would even argue that it's a necessary direction for the church to move. It's necessary for survival - to thwart both the constant temptation of the world and the latent complacency from which the church has suffered in recent history. As always, in order to continue living, the church needs a revival and, to be sure, discipleship may very well be THE form through which new life will invigorate (really, re-invigorate) the church of God in America.
But, here is what concerns me with this latest iteration: discipleship is not and cannot bring revival.
It is a fundamental and simple (but not trite) truth that new life comes only from God. No iteration of Christian faith - from the earliest Christian communities in Jerusalem and Antioch, to the martyrs, to the desert fathers, to the reformers, the great fathers of modern missions, to the revivalists of the Great Awakening, to the contemporary discipleship movement - has ever been able to manufacture any kind of sustainable life within the church. Rather, in each case, it was the holy and active Spirit of God that brought new life, which in turn spawned the earliest Christian communities, the martyrs, the reformers and revivalists, the modern disciples.
Perhaps the simplicity of this idea about the Spirit bringing revival has made it too hard to maintain with any consistency. But, the truth is that discipleship does not bring revival; revival brings discipleship.
****
It is the natural order of life on earth that (A) effort produces (B) results. So even though it makes (human) sense to assume that any desirable result (B) requires human effort (A), we know through Jesus Christ that human effort can never produce any lasting desirable spiritual result. Paradoxically, though, God has chosen to use us to assist Him in accomplishing the purposes of His Kingdom on Earth. As such, it makes perfect sense that the story of God's relationship with His creation is littered with failed human attempts to produce spiritual results. God wants us to participate with Him in what He is doing. God wants us to do something! We are even supposed to be doing something, but whenever we do things (ie, exert human effort), it tends not to produce the spiritual results for which our effort was intended. Paradox indeed!
(Note: I don't even know if I can explain this coherently, or do this Gospel-idea any justice with the application of mere human thought expressed in mere human words. But I'm going to try! Be gracious. This is an idea in progress. Be warned. It's about to get deep, or at least confusing.)
It seems to me that the simplest way to explain it is to say that things work out best when God acts and we react. Humans are fantastic reactionary beings. One might even argue that we were created to react. Think about it this way: the Creator acts and creation reacts. One of the fundamental Christian beliefs is that humans were created for community and relationship as opposed to isolation and separation. What is a relationship if not a series of reactions? Given this, it seems that creation creates chaos when creation tries to act, as opposed to reacting to the Creator.
As a principle for human living, I think that sounds... promising. But what about as an actual practice for human living? As a test case, how might this principle apply to the very beginning of the spiritual life, broadly defined as salvation? Again, the principle is that chaos ensues when the created acts rather than reacts to the Creator.
The very idea of salvation is rooted in the idea that chaos (in salvific terms, sin) is rooted in the actions of humanity and that it would take, literally, an act of God to fix the problem. Ironically, ever since that act of God (read: Jesus Christ), Christian history shows that the church has repeatedly had to address human attempts to reclaim salvation as something attained through human action. That may be too complicated. More simply, ever since Christ, the church - from Paul to the present - has had to fight to ensure that salvation was defined solely in terms of God acting and humans reacting. That is, there is no action through which humanity can save itself from the mess it has created. Salvation is fundamentally about what God has done and our only proper response is to react to what he has done. So far, so good.
****
But what about discipleship? Moving beyond the beginning stage of spiritual life, return to discipleship. If salvation is rooted in the act of God and response of Christians, it can just as easily be argued that the next stage of spiritual life (sanctification, spiritual formation, discipleship, call it what you will) is equally rooted in the same pattern of divine act and human reaction. Discipleship is just as dependent on God's acting as is salvation. Equally, the human role in discipleship is just as dependent on God's action as is the human role in salvation. His is the call; our's is the response.
Thus, my concern with discipleship is the same as it would be for any other new paradigm or iteration for spiritual living in the church. I'm concerned that we are going to make it about us. I'm concerned that we are going to make it about what we know and about what we do.
In fact, I'm afraid because I'm seeing it already. I'm hearing people say that they are not ready to disciple someone else because they don't know enough. If that is the case, then what is the point at which someone does know enough? Who decides what body of knowledge is adequate before attempting to disciple another?
I'm hearing people say they don't feel like they are doing enough to be a discipler. If that is the case, then what is the point at which one's life produces enough fruit? Who decides what body of work is adequate before attempting to disciple another?
If discipleship is fundamentally about what you can do or what you know, then I want nothing to do with discipleship. In fact, I want nothing to do with anything - not discipleship or any other iteration - that isn't consistently and solely about seeking out what God is doing because it is never good when God's role as Actor is usurped by someone who is only supposed to re-Act.
If you go to Amazon and search for "leadership," you get 77,506 results. If you search for "followership," you get 174. I didn't search through all 174, but my guess is that none of those results is the Bible. That's the heart of the issue. No one wants to be a follower and everyone is concerned with how best to be a leader. Except, Jesus didn't invite us to take up our crosses and lead other people, he told us to take up our cross and follow him.
Is discipleship bad then? No, of course not. But anything that may provide us the opportunity replace reaction to God with human action carries with it the potential to cause great damage to His Kingdom.
For my current context, it seems highly important to remember that discipleship has the potential to change the world only insofar as much as the power of God is present to work through disciples. In the end as we are going - that is, as we follow Him - we just may find other disciples along the way.
Mastering Memphis, step 6
I started this Mastering Memphis series shortly after graduating from seminary. I wanted to chronicle everything or everyone I had experienced since moving here in the fall of 2004 (War Eagle and Go Sox). Jesse told me it was kind of boring. I can't disagree with her. Other than tales regarding my former roommates, there wasn't a lot that seemed arresting and I'm not sure it was written very well. All in all, it was a fairly insignificant collection of memories.
Memories can be elusive. In his essay, "My Father's Brain," Jonathan Franzen notes how the brain functions as a memory keeper through the process of myelinization. Myelin is a fatty substance that strengthens certain neural connections in the brain, which allows certain neurological memory functions to solidify in developing brains. The least myelinized parts of the brain are those that have the most to do with the process of transitioning short-term memories into long-term ones. This might be most evident in the digression of mental capcities in Alzheimer's sufferers, but perhaps, in more mundane ways, might explain why your grandparents told you the same stories repeatedly. Those were the experiences they remembered best and longest after others had faded obscurity.
Memories can be elusive. In his essay, "My Father's Brain," Jonathan Franzen notes how the brain functions as a memory keeper through the process of myelinization. Myelin is a fatty substance that strengthens certain neural connections in the brain, which allows certain neurological memory functions to solidify in developing brains. The least myelinized parts of the brain are those that have the most to do with the process of transitioning short-term memories into long-term ones. This might be most evident in the digression of mental capcities in Alzheimer's sufferers, but perhaps, in more mundane ways, might explain why your grandparents told you the same stories repeatedly. Those were the experiences they remembered best and longest after others had faded obscurity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)