Music for when I'm gone...

I'm not sure if this is morbid or egotistical or just plain dumb but here goes. I have noticed that music plays a central role in how a person's memory is preserved at the public and private rituals that mark someone's passing. Essentially any 'closing ceremony' is for the benefit of those who remain. So perhaps there is no point in constructing this list - since it will obviously not be for my benefit nor will I have any actual control over how these ceremonies transpire. However, I rationalize this project in the following ways:

1. I assume in the midst of loss having a 'set list' to choose from might be a nice resource to have.

2. I would like to think that through the use of music that is meaningful to me - I could have some referential influence on the tone of the ceremonies.

3. This list in a small way helps me face the eventuality of death (a prospect that still makes me pretty nervous - I won't lie)

Here it is:

One Day I Walk -- Bruce Cockburn

I Don't Care -- Mary Margaret O'Hara

When People Go -- Craig Cardiff

Ojala Que Llueva Cafe -- Juan Luis Guerra

Whole Wide World -- Wreckless Eric

Intervention -- Arcade Fire

Luscious Life -- Patrick Watson

Glósóli -- Sigur Ros

All I Can Do -- Chantal Kreviazuk

Hamburg Song -- Keane

Into the Mystic - Van Morrison

Leah -- Toto

It's The Final Countdown -- Europe

and it would seem to feel good if I could be laid to rest while someone played "Gabriel's Oboe" -- Ennio Morricone

so there it is kind reader. Feel free to post your songs in the comments section. Or make this into a meme. If you have a blog why not post your own list there...

Speaking of Nicaragua

Former youth group member - Deanne Petker got a chance to go to my homeland Nicaragua.

Ain't that pretty...

Deanne works for Samaritian's Purse. Where she tells me that she coordinates all these trips to far away places. Lucky!

Reading the Bible with the Damned

I just started reading Reading the Bible with the Damned by Bob Ekblad. I have found it especially refreshing. He reminds us of the reason we ‘read’ the Bible is, “to speak to the heart of today’s “tax collectors and sinners”. In some circles it has become fashionable to mistake the ‘mind transformation (Romans 12:1, 2)’ of redemption. Of course this debate between the social gospel and the decision based evangelism is incredibly myopic. Anyways Ekblad suggests that if the Bible is to be ‘read’ for the benefit of those who are in need of redemption it should be read with them. He suggests that instead of just reading (and by reading he seems to mean: interpreting, understanding, and prescribing) the Bible with ‘insiders’ (scholars, successful religious types) we should read the Bible with the outsiders, the strangers, and the damned. He suggests that when we do that we will get a new vision for what God wants us to see in Scripture. This is still different than suggesting that the ‘damned’ should define our theology. Instead, he gives some examples of a participatory approach to reading the Bible influenced by Carlos Mesters, Ernesto Cardenal Martinez, and Paulo Freire who developed and used lectura popular de la biblia. Ekblad suggests that having monologuing educators deposit information into people’s lives that is alien to them makes them dependant on the authorities and passive to critical evaluation of what they are reading. Instead lectura popular encourages that the voice of the people on the margins be given legitimacy in giving the scripture context.
Ekblad cites three problems that restrict the reading of scripture:
1. The problem of the Bible becoming too culturally familiar. He suggests that we absorb ideas about the Bible by virtue of the culture we live in. These cultural assumptions can often dictate how we interpret the Bible. This is not that that different than the idea I mentioned here.
2. The problem of seeing the Bible as a prescription for what we should do (how we should behave). This is unfortunately all too prevalent in almost every Christian stream. Whether its limiting the stuff we can do (drink and smoke or go with girls that do) or reduce the gospel to a set of tasks that we have to complete to merit redemption. We lose sight of the undeserving grace of God.
3. The problem of using Bible characters as heros. When we elevate Biblical characters to hero status we miss/avoid those things about them that were so much less than heroic and in the process put them precisely out of reach. (To be honest this one I’m not so clear on)
Of course, this opens up some pretty big questions in my mind. Like for instance: who do we turn to for authority on Scripture? How do we develop a theology that we can trust isn’t just self serving?
On the other hand…
Some of the most important places of learning and spiritual inspiration for me have been when I have ‘read’ the Bible with the marginalized. In my field youth are those people. And when I read the scriptures with them I am reminded that the Bible speaks youth-en-ese. I can see when I read it with them how hopefully and reassuringly the Bible talks about relationships. When for instance I read Exodus 21 to my senior highs it was awesome to hear them interact with what on the surface seemed like some outlandish laws that God was laying down. They got it. They said yeah we can see how God is trying to set up some boundaries for this new society that was forming out there in the desert. It speaks to them.
Well, I do think that Ekblad will have a few more interesting turns to throw at me. NEXT: Chapter 2.

Thoughts on Nicaragua

Char and I were sitting outside of the convention center. As we were sitting there one of the grounds keepers came up to us and we struck up a conversation and I’m not sure exactly how but we started talking about Nicaragua. This guy was pretty set on the idea that if Daniel Ortega got elected the president of Nicaragua that it would be a bad thing. “After all,” he said – “he’s a socialist.”
Now I’m pretty much out of touch when it comes to Latin American politics but for what its worth here’s a few perspectives:
Most of what I’ve been reading both in the local new media: (See: La Prensa, La Noticia, El Nuevo Diario, brush up on your Spanish before you go) and in other publications (See: The Economist, NPR, CNN, and Time) give a pretty similar picture of Ortega.
Ortega has claimed that he has changed: “My idol was Sandino, and also Christ. I was brought up a Christian, but I regarded Christ as a rebel, a revolutionary.” He claims to have had a conversion experience and is embracing the Catholic church which shunned is former communist regime. Ortega was a war president rising to power as the most articulate of the 5 leaders of the Junta National, he fought the U.S. backed contras for most of his presidency. Some of the articles I read even suggested that Ortega might be leaning strongly to a form of liberation theology popular in many parts of the Latin American Catholic church.
Of course most of the reporting give cautious hope at best that this new leaf is little more than wily electioneering on Ortega’s part.
Ortega makes Washington nervous. Ortega still holds strong affinity with Cuba and most recently with Venezuela. From my rudimentary perspective there does seem to be a strongly anti-American block of leadership forming in Latin America that has reacted against the right wing foreign policy of the Republican party. It will be interesting to see if these leaders can develop enough cohesion to manipulate some power in the region.
Ortega’s skeletons mean Nicaraguans should try sleeping with one eye open at least until he delivers on some of the promises of peace and fair trade.
Nicaraguans have long been pawns for political agendas that were not of their own making. If Ortega can help Nicaragua find its own voice on the world stage – he will earn my respect.
So we wait and hold our breath…