06.11.10

pastors and pulpits

Posted in humor, leadership, mission at 11:00 am by len

In the pulpit I’m the star of my own movie and you are the extras.

Well, that is the feeling I’ve had in some large churches. (And maybe I am naive to think small churches are immune). Honestly, I don’t think I could ever do the video venue thing. Even if it was useful, it would likely corrupt into something ugly. Multiplying venues is not the same as multiplying churches, and tends to avoid our engagement in the context. Granted also that there are men and women who have survived the spotlight, I just believe they are more rare than we think.

David Hayward has output some great cartoons over the years. These ones I plucked from Michael Krahn.

cartoon

cartoon

Elsewhere and kinda related, “Humor in the Pulpit.”

09.08.09

laughter..

Posted in humor, learning, poetry/prose at 8:18 am by len

A laugh for the way my life has gone
A laugh for the love of a friend
A laugh for the fools in the eyes of the world
The love that will never end
Ha Ha Ha… 
  Bruce Cockburn, 1976

Last night I finished The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco. It’s quite a tour of a medieval monastery, the great swirling debates of the time, as well as the political machinations of popes and princes. There is a great deal of Latin, 90% of which I miss. And the monologues tend to be excessive.

But the curious thing about the story is that the plot and the murders in the Abbey revolve around a particular book, and the theological issue of laughter. It turns out that laughter was an issue of debate at the time, with such luminaries as William of Occam and Roger Bacon weighing in. The deeper issue was the relationship of the humanity and divinity of Christ, and the working out of the Imago.

Striking to me this morning, however, is that twice in his career to date Bruce Cockburn has used the image of laughter. As above, in 1976, and then in 1992 in this piece:

It’s not the laughter of rain in the drain
It’s not the laughter of a man in pain
It’s not the laughter you can hide behind
It’s not the laughter of a frightened mind
Balanced on the brink only waiting for a shove
You better listen for the laugh of love.

It’s not the laughter of the gloating rich
It’s not the laughter of the sacred bitch
It’s not the laughter of the macho fool
It’s not the laughter that obeys the rules
More of a chain saw in a velvet glove
You better listen for the laugh of love…

It’s not the laughter of a child with toys
It’s not the laughter of the president’s boys
It’s not the laughter of the media king
This laughter doesn’t sell you anything
It’s the wind in the wings of a diving dove
You better listen for the laugh of love.
Whatever else you might be thinking of
You better listen for the laugh of love.

“Listen for the Laugh,” Bruce Cockburn

02.20.09

Irony..

Posted in ekklesia, humor, leadership, transition at 10:48 am by len

I don’t see a lot of good humor on the current transition we are in, so it was a nice moment to visit Out of Ur today and see these two pieces. If you have the perfect caption for the first image by Jonny Hawkins, send it to Out of Ur.

renovations

12.23.08

X Files Christmas..

Posted in humor at 11:32 am by len

57 ELM STREET
BETHLEHEM, PA.
11:51 P.M., DECEMBER 24TH

We’re too late! It’s already been here.
Mulder, I hope you know what you’re doing.

Look, Scully, just like the other homes: Douglas fir, truncated, mounted,  transformed into a shrine; halls decked with boughs of holly; stockings hung by  the chimney, with care.

You really think someone’s been here?

Someone, or something…

Mulder, over here–it’s a fruitcake.

Don’t touch it!  Those things can be lethal…

More X-Files Christmas..

10.20.08

ah-ha!

Posted in humor at 8:32 am by len

calvin

05.28.08

the wisdom of sarcasm

Posted in humor at 7:08 am by len

And sometimes, just the plain hilariious lunacy of it. From the “Despair” site, of course..

04.02.08

MS abandons PowerPoint

Posted in humor at 3:00 pm by len

From Achievable Ends..  (thanks Bill, when my gut recovers I’ll say a prayer for you)..

Bill Gates announced today, that in spite of its popularity, Microsoft (MSFT) would be abandoning PowerPoint. Originally developed by a former Berkeley PhD student, Bob Gaskins and software developer, Dennis Austin at Forethought Software – PowerPoint was launched for the Mac in 1987. Forethought was purchased by Microsoft later that year and PowerPoint was released for Windows in 1990.

Gates made the announcement at a symposium put on in Seattle by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Eyeballs. Commenting at P.E.T.E yesterday, Gates stated,

“Listen this has nothing to do with Apple’s purportedly superior presentation program, Keynote. I just feel that after almost twenty years, PowerPoint has served it’s purpose. If you remember, I didn’t even use it for my presentation at CES in January. But, quite frankly, that isn’t the real reason we’ve canned the product.

As you may remember, Time Magazine voted Bono, my wife and me, Persons of the Year a few years back. It’s because of our efforts to make the world a better place.

Dispensing with PowerPoint is a part of that initiative. We realize that no matter how wonderful the software is, it’s being used in ways that are hurting people.”

Gates said that one of the main complaints he’d heard about the presentation software was its use in churches. He stated that there are over 300,000 churches in America and it would seem a vast percentage were using PowerPoint. And using it badly.

“From cluttered screens to using every font in their system, churches are making a mockery of the power of this program. Things fly in, things zip out. It’s making congregants sick. And Microsoft has had enough litigation issues without having to worry about a class-action lawsuit from the millions of pew sitters in America.”

01.25.08

in the round

Posted in humor, life happens at 9:40 am by len

01.03.08

Osteen, Marketing Jesus, and Scripture

Posted in culture, gospel, humor, theology at 5:00 pm by len

John La Grou points to a new website dedicated to Christvertising. One of those coffee snorting experiences, satire at its best.

iMonk points to an article in Slate Magazine on the shiny, happy world of Joel Osteen. It’s true that I don’t link this kind of writing very much; maybe I’m a little too much on the positive side myself. What would Paul say? Maybe Galatians 6:7.

Each of [Osteen's] sermons kicks off with Osteen’s patented chant, with those 47,000 voices declaring, “This is my Bible. I am what it says I am. I have what it says I have. I do what it says I can do,” and building to an oddly colorful climax: “I am about to receive the incorruptible, indestructible, ever-living seed of God, and I will never be the same. Never, never, never. I will never be the same. In Jesus’ name. Amen.”

Prodigal Kiwis points to an interview with NT Wright:

DOOR: Why do we need the Bible?

WRIGHT: The Bible is here to equip God’s people to carry forward His purposes of new covenant and new creation. It is there to enable people to work for justice, to sustain their spirituality as they do so, to create and enhance relationships at every level, and to produce that new creation which will have something of the beauty of God himself. The Bible isn’t like an accurate description of how a car is made. It’s more like the mechanic who helps you fix it, the garage attendant who refuels it, and the guide who tells you how to get where you’re going. And where you’re going is to make God’s new creation happen in his world, not simply to find your own way unscathed through the old creation…”

12.21.07

Deconstructing Ontotheology

Posted in humor, postmodernity at 8:41 am by len

Er.. wha…?

Earlier this year… or was it last year.. I dunno I turned fifty in May and the years increasingly blend together…

Anyway, at some point the recent past I got playing with some Berkeley Breathed cartoons, inspired by that tireless trickster Robbymac. Besides, I’m trying to take life a little less seriously.. on occasion.

So I got playing with some frames from the famed artist, and came up with two versions of one strip. The first is a consideration of Ontotheology, the second has a more practical bent. I’ll offer both here below.. Read the rest of this entry »

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »