About those Nazis in Dearborn -

Okay, so most of you probably saw this post yesterday:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/1vt0eek/the_christian_crusade_demonstration_in_dearborn/

It generated a lot of attention. 380 comments (at time of writing), 90 upvotes. And 9 reports. One of the better reports (I appreciate it, sincerely) stated: "it should probably not be okay to assert something as serious as a nazi rally is associated w/ a particular group (Christian, in this instance) without also providing some kind of source or evidence for that serious claim."

This was a common question throughout the post. I decided this morning to sticky a comment with some context and evidence. But almost 24 hours is often too late for visibility, so I figured I'd made a new post to include those details.

Part one: Who is Jake Lang?

I've written about Lang before. He's a white nationalist provocateur. He first burst onto the scene on January 6th - he brought a baseball bat to the capital and assaulted people with it. He was sentenced to 4 years in prison before being pardoned by Trump in 2025. Since that time he's been involved with a whole bunch of stunts. He regularly burns the Quran at public demonstrations, or rubs bacon all over it. He held a "pro-white" rally in Texas where he called black people monsters. He  attended a a city council meeting with Arab-American councilmembers so he could tell them: "Get the fuck out of my country. We don't want you here." He taunted black protestors, calling them "chimps". He threw nazi salutes, at one point saying "white Christian men are not gonna sit around while you turn our children into a bunch of n*gger lovers".

He was involved in a famous incident in Minneapolis where he ticked off a crowd of counter-protestors and they kicked his ass, until a black man intervened and rescued Lang from the crowd. Nonetheless, Lang is still a racist provocateur, a white nationalist. Most of his rallies center on Islam. He hates Muslims.

So he organized this rally. The Dearborn Crusader March. Dearborn gets a lot of attention from right wing media because it has a high Muslim population. This is not the first time Lang has targeted Dearborn. I shouldn't have to tell you what the language of "crusade" implies here. But here's what worries me: Lang had help.

Part two: Who is Lorenzo Sewell?

Lorenzo Sewell is a black pastor (his race is relevant here) in Detroit. He leads a church called 180 Church. A big part of Sewell's story is his own personal 180. He had a difficult upbringing, culminating in him being deeply involved with drug-dealing and gangs. He relates that one day as a young man, he had a Damascus Road type experience at his grandmother's church, and he turned his life around. So far so good.

Sewell's parish isn't some megachurch, mind you. I don't have exact numbers, but I would guess probably 300 members if this thing is at capacity. But Sewell does have moderate success online. He has 200k followers on his instagram, where he talks a lot about his support for Trump. He hosts a radio show called "Politics and Praise". He's been able to leverage all of this into some political presence. Trump visited 180 Church in 2024. Sewell was invited to speak at the RNC convention that took place a month later. Sewell was invited to deliver a benediction in 2025 for Trump's second inauguration. After speaking, Sewell announced a shitcoin ($Lorenzo) because of course he did. Loaves and fishes in 2026.

Sewell is pretty out there, listening to clips of his shows. He is staunchly MAGA, e.g. pushes stolen election stuff fairly constantly. But what he has in common with Lang is a strong aversion to Muslims and Islam. Why would a black preacher in Detroit who quoted MLK during his speech at the inauguration collaborate with a white nationalist who shouts things like ""white Christian men are not gonna sit around while you turn our children into a bunch of n*gger lovers"?

My first reaction is that it is 2026 and everything is now a parody of itself.

My second reaction is that, of course, they have a common enemy. They are willing to put race aside for the time being to recognize a common enemy. It really troubles me that a black pastor with this much of a platform hates Muslims enough that he's willing to collaborate with a white nationalist. There's no getting around it, Sewell is a gullible fool to whatever extent he is himself not just a hatemonger. It troubles me that Lang's brand is not toxic enough for this to damage Sewell's reputation within either the political realm or the Christian world. It troubles me that people are calling Lang a conservative activist, not a white nationalist provocateur.

Part three: Who are the guys in the picture?

Remember that hate is a spectrum. Lang is very far along on this spectrum. But there is always a bigger, more racist fish.

The guys in this picture are not associated with Lang. They actually showed up as counter-protestors. You see them in videos, they're outside the main crowd shouting their own incendiary things. People with Lang shout back at them. They are prominently standing in front of that Swastika, dressed like Nazis. I spent some time zooming in on that piece of paper the guy is holding. I can't quite make out what it says at the very top, I was hoping that would clue me in on whatever organization this is with. But the headline reads "Jake Lang is a Jew!"

Funnily enough, I banned someone in the original thread for this. The actual fact is true. Jake Lang was born and raised Jewish. He has subsequently disavowed his Jewishness, even pushed antisemitic memes. You might think it strange for some neo-nazi punk to be Jewish, but it wouldn't be the first time. But the reason that guy got banned isn't just recognizing that Lang was born Jewish, it was presenting this as some larger conspiracy that Lang is part of an OP coordinated by the Jews writ large. The guy I banned claimed that Lang was a Jewish operative trying to make Christians look bad. Please don't do that shit here, Jews are people just as much as anyone else and not every Jew is an agent of Mossad, ffs.

You need to understand that white nationalists are paranoid people. Not for no reason. They are associated with decades of bombings and murders, and constant plans to take out the power grid. The Feds have constantly infiltrated their ranks with informants (which is a good thing) and will continue to do so. This leads to some outlandish conjecture. Nazis are constantly playing a stupid version of Amongus, accusing one another of being the infiltrator. Its easy to wonder that here. Are these guys plants by Jake Lang to get attention and make himself look good? Was he trying to insinuate that Palestinian protestors are Nazis? I don't think any of that is likely. These guys have their own literature and, frankly, there is enough infighting in the Nazi world we don't have to invent a more juicy narrative. They resent Lang because they are a brand of Nazi that hates Jews more than Muslims, whereas Lang is a brand of Nazi that hates Muslims more than Jews. I want to say they deserve each other - but no, they deserve a worldview that isn't contentiously hateful and divisive and I hope each and every one of them finds their way out of that cycle of hate.

So to wrap this up, these guys are not with Lang, but they are the same spectrum as Lang. They are just as symptomatic and worrisome as Lang is himself. This is what a Christian "crusade" looks like in 2026.

What a disgrace to our witness. God have mercy on these fools.

reddit.com
u/slagnanz — 18 hours ago

What are your favorite overlooked little side stories from the Gospels?

I'm talking about random things you hardly see discussed in mainstream discourse. For example, the naked young fugitive in the Garden.

I'm writing a class on how people encounter Jesus and I'm wanting to make sure I'm not missing any weird or interesting little strange encounters.

reddit.com
u/slagnanz — 4 days ago

Sunday afternoon brunch thread - How was Church?

This is a thread to share whether there was anything that stood out to you in church this morning (or yesterday, or any other day this week you may have worshiped).

Did you learn anything interesting in the sermon? Was there a verse that stood out to you? Did a song resonate with you? Did God lay anything cool on your heart? Was there a snack at coffee hour that stole the show?

Post about it here!

If you aren't the sort to go to church, that's fine too! Feel welcome to share anything neat from your spiritual walk this past week.

reddit.com
u/slagnanz — 5 days ago

A Meditation on James the Just: Memorizing the Face of God

It feels like we should know more about this guy.

I mean, depending on who you ask, he’s Jesus’ brother, or His step-brother, or maybe His cousin. But we don’t get a lot of details about how he goes from growing up alongside Jesus to being Bishop of Jerusalem. 

There’s a good chance he was there in Mark 3. Jesus’ extended family is watching Jesus interact with the crowds, and their actual reaction recorded in the Scripture is to say “He is out of his mind”. A bit later in the chapter they try to pull Jesus away, and He resists. 

>Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”

>“Who are my mother and my brothers?” he asked.

>Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers!

You have to imagine that stung. 

It also is noteworthy that James isn’t mentioned as being present at the crucifixion. This is one of the arguments against James being Jesus’ full brother. From John’s Gospel:

>Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!”  Then He said to the disciple, “Behold your mother!” And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home.

This would be highly unusual if Mary was also the mother of James. You’d expect James to take care of Mary if he was also her son. But this is speculative. Nevertheless, the tenor of these two stories gives us the impression that James was not particularly close with Jesus throughout his ministry on Earth. 

But something changes after the Resurrection. 1 Corinthians 15 shows us that after Jesus appears to the twelve, He appears to James before appearing to any of the other apostles. Why James? This could certainly just be familial loyalty. But for James it seems to be a turning point. He is barely featured in the Gospels, but he would go on to become one of the most prominent leaders in the early church, the first Bishop of Rome. As always, in God’s providence we must expect the unexpected.

There are many legends of James told outside of Scripture. Eusebius wrote that James lived as a Nazarite, leading a strict ascetic life. There’s this amazing anecdote from Eusebius:

>And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel.

It’s hard not to chuckle at that, honestly. 

But the best glimpse we get at who James was and what he was about comes from James’ Epistle. It's a short read (only a few pages). James is a man of action. The epistle emphasizes that faith compels works. A few samples: 

>“What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but does not have works? Surely that faith cannot save, can it? If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food and one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill,” and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of that? So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.”

>“For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is also dead.”

>“Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself unstained by the world.”

This is a compelling vision of faith. I like to see it as standing in tension with many of the ideas that Paul articulated, but not in contradiction. Christians should enjoy the challenge of synthesizing their different perspectives, each having captured the truth from different angles. 

What really stood out to me on my most recent reread:

>“If anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man observing the face he was born with in a mirror; because he has observed himself and gone away, and has immediately forgotten what he was like. For the one who has gazed intently into the perfect law, which is one of freedom, and has stayed there next to it, becoming not a forgetful listener but instead a doer of work-this one will be blissful in what he does.” (for this passage I’m using David Bentley Hart’s intriguing New Testament translation). 

This is the impression James Just leaves on me: A man, kneeling on the hard stone of the temple, gazing inward through prayer, contemplating the law as if it were his own face. Memorizing the contours, the wrinkles, where the smooth curves terminate through hard lines. The perfect law of God paints a picture of the face of his brother, Christ. This is this urgency in James' writing: we cannot, simply cannot, forget that face.

u/slagnanz — 6 days ago

A light-hearted history of Skillet - raging on behalf of the machine and becoming your father

I originally wrote the first version of this for a post on r/Christianity 3 years ago. I recently decided I liked that post enough that I should brush it up a little bit and put it on my blog. This also allowed me to update the history through the present day.

Please enjoy a bit of satire against a very silly band that many of us grew up thinking was very cool.

carrioncomfort.substack.com
u/slagnanz — 11 days ago

Sunday Morning brunch thread - how was Church?

This is a thread to share whether there was anything that stood out to you in church this morning (or yesterday, or any other day this week you may have worshiped).

Did you learn anything interesting in the sermon? Was there a verse that stood out to you? Did a song resonate with you? Did God lay anything cool on your heart? Was there a snack at coffee hour that stole the show?

Post about it here!

If you aren't the sort to go to church, that's fine too! Feel welcome to share anything neat from your spiritual walk this past week.

reddit.com
u/slagnanz — 19 days ago

A Meditation on Esther: Approach the Throne with Boldness

Edit: I forgot to attribute the image. This is a painting called 'Solomon and the Queen of Sheba', by Claude Vignon, 1624. The painting is on display in the Louvre!

When I think of Esther, this is the image that lingers in my mind. 

She isn’t supposed to be here, it isn’t her place

The king is cruel and capricious, we know how he cast his previous queen away for defying his drunken demands. But to approach the throne? According to the law, approaching him unbidden means death

And yet, here she is. Esther approaches. She is bold, resolute, more than a little defiant. As providence would have it, the king is charmed. Esther 15 (from the additions to Esther) says “God changed the spirit of the king into mildness”. So, Esther is delivered from the king’s wrath;  he extends his scepter towards her to pardon the offense and allows her to make her request.  

Esther’s prayer in Esther 14 (also from the Apocrypha in my Bible) unpacks the strength of her conviction through her faith:

>“O Lord, do not surrender your scepter to what has no being, and do not let them laugh at our downfall, but turn their plan against them and make an example of him who began this against us.  Remember, O Lord; make yourself known in this time of our affliction and give me courage, O King of the gods and Master of all dominion! Put eloquent speech in my mouth before the lion and turn his heart to hate the man who is fighting against us, so that there may be an end of him and those who agree with him. But save us by your hand and help me, who am alone and have no helper but you, O Lord.

I keep coming back to this image because it makes me think of the boldness we are called to in the Christian life. As Paul says in Hebrews 4, “Let us therefore approach the throne of grace with boldness, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.” 

This is what we see in Esther, approaching the throne with boldness to find grace in her time of need. It's an uncanny parallel that almost makes you wonder if Paul wasn't directly referencing this story to an audience who knew and cherished it well.

One thing to consider about the throne: Ahasuerus/Xerxes is obviously not like God, he is far from good, even though he sits on the throne to lift himself up as if he were God. He has the power to spare or condemn, deliver or destroy. But as we see in this story he is easily swayed one way or the other for good or ill. I wonder if this is what Esther meant by “that what has no being”: the king is hollow, he is a pale imitation of true authority. God takes control of the scepter. 

So in a very real sense it’s like Esther sees right through Ahasuerus and his hollow authority. Instead, she sees a higher King on a higher Throne. This is the throne she approaches with boldness knowing God wields the true scepter. This is the image that matters to us as we think about our place before God.

One final stray thought I wanted to add to close with, something I found lovely. We know Esther by name she took to hide her identity amongst the Persians. Her real name, her Hebrew birthname, is Hadassah. The name Hadassah comes from the word for myrtle tree. Myrtle trees in scripture symbolize hope and restoration, as we see in this line from Isaiah 55:

>“Instead of the thorn shall come up the cypress; instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle”. 

Esther is the myrtle amongst the thorns of exile, the means of God’s deliverance for such a time as this.

u/slagnanz — 1 month ago

Sunday Morning brunch thread - How was Church?

This is a thread to share whether there was anything that stood out to you in church this morning (or yesterday, or any other day this week you may have worshiped).

Did you learn anything interesting in the sermon? Was there a verse that stood out to you? Did a song resonate with you? Did God lay anything cool on your heart? Was there a snack at coffee hour that stole the show?

Post about it here!

If you aren't the sort to go to church, that's fine too! Feel welcome to share anything neat from your spiritual walk this past week.

reddit.com
u/slagnanz — 1 month ago

This sub is suspicious

I've been getting complaints that this sub has been inviting people en masse from other Christian subs. I got one myself. The mods never replied to my modmail.

Four mods, none of them actively posting here. They all appear to be hawking some anti-porn app. Anyways, post here at your own risk.

Top mod is a bot per bot bouncer:

https://www.reddit.com/r/BotBouncer/s/nERgww2Whk

reddit.com
u/slagnanz — 1 month ago

MAGNIFICA HUMANITAS has profound moral clarity about technology, dehumanization, the dignity of all humanity, and our responsibility for the oppressed

I've been working my way through MAGNIFICA HUMANITAS this past week. For the unfamiliar, this is Pope Leo XIV's first Encyclical. It is worth your time.  The Encyclical was touted as being primarily about AI. And it is true that quite a bit of the text is devoted to the moral, spiritual, theological questions surrounding new technologies. There is no question that these technological and economic questions are a primary concern for Pope Leo. He explained very shortly after being elected:  

>"I chose to take the name Leo XIV. There are different reasons for this, but mainly because Pope Leo XIII in his historic Encyclical Rerum Novarum addressed the social question in the context of the first great industrial revolution. In our own day, the Church offers to everyone the treasury of her social teaching in response to another industrial revolution and to developments in the field of artificial intelligence that pose new challenges for the defence of human dignity, justice and labour."

But the emphasis of the Encyclical is not about AI, it's about US. Humans. Who we are, what defines us, what we're owed. All of it, as you might guess from the title (Magnificent Humanity) is grounded in the dignity of the human person as image-bearers of God. From the text:

>The fundamental dignity of each person, therefore, is neither acquired nor earned, nor does it need to be justified. The recent Declaration Dignitas Infinita offers a summary of the Church’s thinking on this subject: “Every human person possesses an infinite dignity, inalienably grounded in his or her very being, which prevails in and beyond every circumstance, state, or situation the person may ever encounter”.

This dignity creates several moral demands. Leo grounds his argument in human rights ("human rights are not an external addition to the person, but an expression of intrinsic human dignity, which the international community is called to protect and promote"), solidarity, subsidiarity, the common good, and social justice. This is how the question of AI is framed, as a question about human dignity and its impacts on human rights, justice, and the common good. As the Encyclical states:

>Justice demands that we prevent the emergence of new forms of exclusion and deprivation of freedoms: individuals and peoples hindered or denied access to basic technologies, communities exposed to invasive surveillance and social groups penalized by opaque algorithms that perpetuate prejudice and discrimination.

I find much of this quite compelling and I think the Pope's concerns are very legitimate here. But it isn't just about AI. In the next paragraph, it continues:

>A litmus test for social justice today is the treatment of migrants, refugees and those forced to move due to poverty, violence, climate change and environmental disasters. The way a society treats them reveals whether its sense of justice is driven by fear or by the spirit of fraternity. Pope Francis urged us to see migrants not simply as a problem to be managed, but as a living image of the People of God on the move. They are people with dignity, resources and dreams, who have the right to be treated with respect and to ask to become active members of the societies that welcome them. Social justice in this area entails at least two complementary commitments. On the one hand, this means protecting the rightful hopes of those forced to leave by ensuring safe and legal routes, dignified conditions for receiving them, and genuine pathways to integration. On the other hand, it means promoting the right to remain in one’s homeland in peace and security by addressing the root causes that force people to migrate, including those linked to economic injustices and the climate crisis. When these rights are respected, migration can become an opportunity for encounter and mutual enrichment among peoples.

I found this particularly compelling. I think Pope Leo is right to connect these issues. Not simply because AI and the current anti-immigrant panic both happen to be ascendant at the same time, both posing a threat to human dignity. But in many ways they are linked. Leo likens AI to the tower of Babel. He describes its risks thusly: 

>“We must, then, avoid the “Babel syndrome,” namely the idolatry of profit that sacrifices the weak, “uniformity that neutralizes differences, and the pretense that a single language — even a digital one — can translate everything, including the mystery of the person, into data and performance.”

Babel warns us of a world where there is no productive tension, where nobody stops to question whether the machine they are building is right or just. It just happens, automatically because we see it as an extension of ourselves and our own power. It is hard to deny AI is spoken of the same way. AI is coming whether we want it or not! And in many ways, we’ve already seen the attractive world it promises. In an age that is increasingly lonely and hard to comprehend, AI is warm and endlessly comprehensible. But this risks flattening the complexity of the human person to whatever data the AI trains on. To whatever guardrails these companies do or don’t put in place. Will the AIs that  we build understand the full dignity of the human person or will they just be a tool of dominance? From the Encyclical:

>The modern Babel can be seen not only in the globalized technocratic paradigm, but also in the remote clash between opposing imperialisms, between powers that wish to preserve their supremacy, and those that aspire to seize that supremacy, resulting in a multiplicity of local conflicts. Moreover, there seems to be no limit to the race — driven by a dehumanizing ambition — to develop evermore powerful technologies or to secure control over them.

I can’t help but think of a story I heard yesterday. A few weeks ago, a movie called Citizen Vigilante came out. It has been the buzz of the worst parts of twitter. The movie depicts a wealthy vigilante character who goes around an unnamed European city murdering immigrants who are accused of various salacious crimes. In that respect it is structurally no different from “Birth of a Nation”, which depicts klansmen (presented as noble) going around protecting the honor of white women raped by black men. But Citizen Vigilante has one key difference — the majority of the people murdered by the vigilante are white. The protagonist murders a whole family of migrants, sure, but most of the bloodshed are police, corrupt judges, etc. Now, one kind of person would probably have some concerns with the whole premise of all of this. Another kind of person might wonder — hey, how come we don’t get to see more dead immigrants? Enter Count Luke Twombly Von Jolly, a Twitter account that regularly shares white supremacist memes. He weighs in: “People who are complaining that he spends the first half of the movie murdering white people not migrants fail to understand that it’s hammering home an important premise. “Always hang a traitor before you shoot an enemy”. 

Twombly Von Jolly’s tweet was shared by none other than Twitter’s owner, Elon Musk. Musk went on a bender over the next several days promoting this movie. But he keeps coming back to this refrain. A couple days later another account shared an image of the vigilante pointing a gun along with text reading “First the traitors, then the invaders”. Musk replied “yes”. Musk began to use the phrase himself. Replying to a story about a German feminist who made some anti-natalist remarks, Musk said “Deal with traitors first, then invaders”. A few days later, Musk replied to another video about the DSA, saying “traitors before invaders”. 

These fantasies about minorities and traitors are not new. This is no different from the dream of The Turner Diaries, a 1978 novel by a white nationalist named William Luther Pierce. I don’t need to get into too much depth about a nazi book here, but the climactic event of this novel is something called “the day of the rope”, when the traitors to the white race are dragged out of their homes and executed. First the traitors. Once they are eliminated, then we see the other races systematically eliminated. Then the invaders. I mean to say without exaggeration that Elon Musk is normalizing the exact same arguments and rhetoric of The Turner Diaries. He’s dreaming about the day of the rope, on the social media platform that he owns and controls. 

If you click around the replies to Musk, the people that Musk retweets, there’s a common theme. They’re all watching and sharing all of these videos of immigrants doing violence, almost ritualistically. This is no different from how Stormfront and other neo-nazi websites had whole pages devoted to cataloguing crimes by black people. They wanted to overwhelm you with an inescapable feeling of dread and fear. To harden your heart and stamp out any impulse for kindness or curiosity for your fellow humans. The human mind is strangely elastic. It makes us great at adaptation, but also psychologically vulnerable to repetition. If we are repeatedly exposed to images and videos that show minorities committing crimes over and over again, of course we will begin to believe they are inherently criminal. If you want to know why the world’s richest man has gotten to the point of dreaming of the “day of the rope”, it's because he spends 12 hours a day online steeped in hate, watching these videos.

This is a long-winded way of saying that social media already has powerful mechanisms for flattening the complexity and dignity of the human person for the purposes of dehumanization. But what if we build technology with ever-widening power over how information is disseminated, over the dreams that we dream, the futures we imagine? Technology that governs how we talk to each other, surveils our behavior, calculates in nebulous ways where the superpower military drops its bombs. Will this increase dignity or destroy it? The treatment of immigrants and minorities we see today is symptomatic of a world that is hurtling thoughtlessly towards an AI horizon, with men like Elon Musk holding the reigns. Pope Leo is right to be concerned. 

u/slagnanz — 1 month ago

Joe Rogan and the Post-Modern "church"

I came across this video about how Joe Rogan and other influencers talk about church.

Conservative Postmodernism - Nash Keune

I think this articulates something I've noticed with modern values regarding the church. I've certainly seen plenty of people who talk about preserving Christian culture in a kind of hollowed out way - even Richard Dawkins has talked about this. I've also seen the corny edits for instagram and tiktok with clips of Crusaders and random clips from Catholic Mass or Orthodox Divine Liturgy, in this skin-deep kind of aesthetic way. As if the only thing that matters about the Eucharist is how cool and alpha it looks. And how could I forget the "remember what they took from you" memes showing images of families in the 1950's at church, which is quite funny considering ... church still exists and you can still take your family there. These guys know that church is still a thing that exists, right?

But the point isn't about church in any real or particular sense. Church is just a simulacrum, as the video argues. They aren't interested in church as it is. Church as it is is too vulnerable, too messy. It requires getting out of bed on sunday morning, having to politely explain to a deaf old woman what you do for a living (something to do with computers), showing kindness and support to people even when they suck, and (perhaps worst of all) confessing your sins to almighty God.

Now I want to be clear, I don't think this is as political as it sounds. The video certainly presents the issue as conservative postmodernism and I think that's right. But I think this is a problem we all contend with in the modern world. We live in a culture saturated with grievance, where it is easier to cringe at your enemies than it is to sincerely believe in the leaders of your own cause. A lot of liberal-minded people would do well to ask themselves if they really care for progressive ideals more than they hate Trump. In similar terms, is church something that we love for itself, or is it something that excites us only when it is presented as a a middle finger to whatever we dislike?

I really resonated with the point about tradition and memes. In a lot of ways everybody is dissatisfied with the Gesellschaft, we all want deeper, more organic, rooted communities. That makes reactionary traditionalism very tempting, to plug into something with roots, something that defies the atomizing loneliness of the modern age, to find real community in an age of disconnect. But we can't help but seek that in post-modern terms. We look for that connection in a mimetic sense, community without presence and church without... CHURCH. Joe Rogan's vision of church is hollowed out, a place you can check out that's interesting where people go to try to be better people.

But Church isn't skin deep. It isn't just another trend for podcasters to enjoy. It isn't a symbol of rebellion against modernity. It is a place with real community and real history that demands real participation. If dissatisfaction with modernity gets you in the door, great. But one day you do have to cross from the Narthex to the Nave, because church is more than just a meme.

u/slagnanz — 1 month ago

Christ Among the Kaijū - a Theological Reflection on Strange Beasts

I've been working on this essay for several months off and on. It started as a review of Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind and spiraled into something bigger. I hope you enjoy reading as much as I did writing it.

Note, there are spoilers for Godzilla, Final Fantasy X, and Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind within.

open.substack.com
u/slagnanz — 2 months ago

Sunday morning brunch thread - How was church?

This is a thread to share whether there was anything that stood out to you in church this morning (or yesterday, or any other day this week you may have worshiped).

​

Did you learn anything interesting in the sermon? Was there a verse that stood out to you? Did a song resonate with you? Did God lay anything cool on your heart? Was there a snack at coffee hour that stole the show?

​

Post about it here!

​

If you aren't the sort to go to church, that's fine too! Feel welcome to share anything neat from your spiritual walk this past week.

reddit.com
u/slagnanz — 2 months ago

Giants pitchers’ Bible verses on Pride Night caps show how they’ve missed the point

There's been a small kerfuffle in MLB over pride night and a couple pitchers who decided to write verses on their caps or refused to wear pride hats.

Grant Brisbee is one of my favorite sports writers and I really enjoyed this piece which is very topical here. A couple choice excerpts

>In the context of the moment, it was a tone-deaf action considering how the HIV/AIDS epidemic had devastated the city. Every adult who had been in the Bay Area long enough had known people who should still be there, people with life left to live who were gone much, much too soon. A lot of those people should still have a lot of life to live right now, with decades of memories behind them. The event was a response to the chaos and carnage that ripped through the city. It was a small measure of something, when doing nothing was the default.

>Many Bible verses address how to treat people who have lost so much, who need to find strength in the darkest of times, and who must rely on the strength of community to persevere. If Dewey had seen the humanity of the people asking for help, the pain they had to endure, and the pain they were hoping to prevent, he could have pointed them in that direction. Instead, he made it about himself to focus on the perceived sin. To focus on that perceived sin, he had to judge, not help.

Later:

>After the game, Roupp told reporters, “I’m thankful we live in a country where, you know, we have the freedom to believe what we want … and express what we want.” I’m also thankful for this, and I’m using that same freedom to suggest that he’s only scratching the surface of what he’s purporting to believe in. Dig deeper, my dude. Dig a lot deeper. There’s a way to help people navigate this life with the respect and grace they deserve. It is a choice to ignore that on a night dedicated to people who need others on their side. Do better. That’s the only thing we’re all supposed to do around here, anyway. Do better.

nytimes.com
u/slagnanz — 2 months ago

"What is to prevent me from being baptized?" - Stories of LBGTQ+ Acceptance and Faith

Herbert Boekl's mural \"Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch\" from the Angel's Chapel in Seckau Abbey. Credit to Theology and the Arts (link at bottom of post)

Acts, chapter 8 - Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch

An Angel of the Lord appears to the Apostle Philip and commands him to get up and go south down the road from Jerusalem to Gaza. So he gets up and goes. Along the way he comes across a chariot in the road - again, the spirit stirs in Philip and tells him to go over to the chariot and ask if he can join.

The chariot belongs to an unnamed eunuch from Ethiopia. In the Ethiopian Orthodox tradition their name is generally understood to either be Djan Darada or Simeon Bakos. For the sake of simplicity, I'm going to call them Bakos.  For those who might not be familiar, eunuchs were castrated men who typically served important roles in royal courts. Bakos is said to be a royal treasurer.

It's important to highlight that eunuchs were outcasts under the law of Moses. Deuteronomy 23:1 explicitly bans them from the "assembly of the Lord", which essentially meant barring them from religious and civic gatherings. They were similarly barred from approaching the altar or veil of the temple. This is to say that eunuchs at this time were, according to both modern and ancient contexts, queer. Bakos is the only openly queer character that appears in scripture.

It is worth noting that Isaiah does make an interesting promise with regard to faithful eunuchs (Isaiah 56):

>^(4) For thus says the Lord:
To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths,
who choose the things that please me
and hold fast my covenant,
^(5) I will give, in my house and within my walls,
a monument and a name
better than sons and daughters;
I will give them an everlasting name
that shall not be cut off.

So despite the law banning eunuchs from the temple and assembly, there is this promise of future inclusion and restoration.

Philip acts in this spirit. He goes to Bakos and sits with them. He reads Isaiah (the very same book that promises future restoration to eunuchs!) with them, and he proclaims the good news of Jesus. He does not push Bakos aside as inferior or an abomination. He treats Bakos with love and acceptance.

Bakos responds by asking "Look, here is water! What is to prevent me from being baptized?". And without hesitation, Philip baptizes them. This is that future promise of inclusion being fulfilled through Christ. Bakos is welcome into the assembly of believers, they are outcasts no longer. They are given a name and a place and full inclusion in the body of Christ.

----

In that spirit, I want to create this thread as a space for LGBTQ+ Christians to share their stories of about love, inclusion, and acceptance, and what that has meant for their faith. To have a safe space to sit with one another and be ostracized no longer.

Please note: I will be treating this thread like a support thread. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it at all. If you are here to argue about homosexuality, we will remove that. You are free to start your own thread. If you don't like that we're doing this, please feel free to post a meta thread. This thread is only for stories of acceptance. Blessings, and happy pride my friends.

Source for image, Theology and Arts

reddit.com
u/slagnanz — 3 months ago

A meditation on St. Stephen, Protomartyr and Archdeacon - Deliver us from the shell that blinds us, that we might see your face, Lord

Would it be tasteless to compare St. Stephen the Protomartyr to Momma Longneck (you know, Littlefoot’s mother from Land Before Time)? I guess it’s too late now, I’ve already done it. 

\"Lord, do not hold this sin against the T-Rex.”

But what I mean is the movie trope where a loveable character is introduced and then immediately killed. When you watch this happen in a movie, you can’t help but feel a little betrayed by the writers: thank you so much for that casual trauma, I guess. But what makes this trope effective is that it lets you, as a viewer, fill in the gaps. If a character dies well, you find yourself imagining how it was that they lived. And that makes them all the more compelling. 

St. Stephen first shows up in Acts 6. A growing conflict between two groups of early believers had started to boil over. On one side are the Hellenistic Jews, who were a diasporic group of Jews that had assimilated into various parts of Greek culture and language. On the other side are the Hebraic Jews that maintained their connection to the land in Israel and Hebrew culture. Despite their conversion to Christianity, both groups struggled to settle their differences. The Hellenistic Jews began to feel that they were being ostracized, to the point where their widows were starting to be overlooked in the daily distribution of food. This kind of factionalism, injustice, and cruelty could not be allowed to stand in the Church. 

So the Apostles decide to appoint seven people to oversee the distribution of food. This is actually where the church gets the word “deacon” from. The Greek word to describe the distribution of food (which we can also translate as “ministry”) is Diakonia. So the seven men appointed here are deacons or diaconates. Their role is based on service, ministry, and handling those small-but-crucial tasks that keep the church running on a daily basis. Since Stephen has seniority, he serves as the leader of the deacons, or Archdeacon. 

But just a chapter later, Stephen is dead. His ministry provoked the anger of a local group of religious zealots. Stephen is arrested and brought in front of the Sanhedrin to stand trial for blasphemy. The accusation: “This fellow never stops speaking against this holy place (i.e. the temple) and against the law. For we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs Moses handed down to us”. Stephen responds with a lengthy sermon. He recounts many stories throughout the Old Testament where the people turned from God in their jealousy, their faithlessness, their desire for power. He challenges them — his accusers are very concerned about the temple, but he reminds them of what is written in Isaiah, that God is not limited to houses made by human hands, because the whole world is under His dominion, and He will be making everything new. The sermon concludes with some harsh words: “You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you are forever opposing the Holy Spirit, just as your ancestors used to do. Which of the prophets did your ancestors not persecute? They killed those who foretold the coming of the Righteous One, and now you have become his betrayers and murderers. You are the ones who received the law as ordained by angels, and yet you have not kept it.”

As soon as Stephen finishes speaking, the crowd rushes him, drags him out of the city, and stones him to death. 

https://preview.redd.it/q42dclwwfa5h1.jpg?width=620&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=67be4bfbc5a48bc3b92fcec8134ca3cf761f1ee3

His whole story takes up a page and a half of my Bible. I can’t help but wonder about the great work he did that isn’t written here: comforting widows, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, giving shelter to the unhoused, teaching the gospel and offering reassurance to all those who fret or grieve. We can only wonder. There’s a world where we get to see both Stephen and Momma Longneck living out long and happy lives preserved in rich detail. 

Nonetheless, Stephen has the distinction of being the first follower of Christ to be killed for his faith. This is why he is called the Protomartyr, the first martyr. He sets the example for many other Christians who are killed for their faith, which still happens to this day. 

As I reflect on Stephen’s sermon, I am reminded of Terry Pratchett’s Small Gods. Bear with me. The book features a delicious villain: Deacon Vorbis (I also appreciate the irony for our purposes here that he’s a deacon). Vorbis is the head of the Inquisition for the Omnian religion. He’s a ruthless tactician and sadistic torturer serving the church of the great bull-god Om (holy horns). The central mystery of the book is that Om has suddenly found himself transformed from the mighty bull into a humble tortoise. Om and a loyal acolyte go on a strange journey to find out how this could be. Eventually they find out the matter is quite a bit like this particular kind of shellfish, where it builds a bigger and bigger shell until it can no longer move, at which point it dies. The same thing (it seems) happens to gods like Om — “Around the Godde there forms a Shelle of prayers and Ceremonies and Buildings and Priestes and Authority, until at Last the Godde Dies. Ande this maye notte be noticed”. 

In Pratchett’s imagination, a god’s power is tangibly linked to how much people believe in them. So for poor Om, his people stopped believing in him, but the shell of authority that they had built around him, so he lost his power and became small.

 Vorbis is emblematic of this change in belief. He is described as having a mind “like a steel ball . . . Nothing got in or out. So all Vorbis could hear were the distant echoes of his own soul. And out of the distant echoes he would forge a Book of Vorbis”. For a man like this, religion is not a chance to humble himself and seek a truth that is larger than his own imagination. Quite the opposite, it is a tool he can use to twist and shape faith into his own image. Om’s loyal acolyte comes to realize that this kind of religion is “like a man hitting a donkey with a stick. But people like Vorbis made the stick so good, that’s all the donkey ends up believing in”. 

I think this is a great framework to understand St. Stephen’s detractors. They would confine God to a shell, in the form of a temple built by human hands. They do not open their hearts or their ears to hear the word of God through the Holy Spirit because their minds are like a steel ball echoing only their own desires. The law has become their riding crop, which they have focused on so hard they have forgotten the rider. It is no wonder they stone Stephen — they would suffocate him under stones just like they try to confine God into the stone shell of the temple and the law. 

There is one last twist here. As Stephen dies, he begs God not to condemn those who murdered him. This is a significant detail because of one particular strange figure, sitting off to the side, seeming to preside over the stoning. Other zealots have laid their coats at his feet, suggesting he has authority here. His name is Saul. Yes, that Saul. Saul at this point is like Vorbis. He is blinded by his own skewed version of justice, worshipping the shell of religion rather than the full being of God. But Stephen begs God not to hold this sin against him. Consider the magnitude of Stephen’s forgiveness. Because God spares Saul and opens his eyes, Saul will become one of the most important leaders in the early church. It is Stephen’s forgiveness and mercy that makes this possible. Stephen is an example to Saul of what it looks like to be free of the shell that Saul is trapped in, and soon Saul will see this clearly. 

reddit.com
u/slagnanz — 3 months ago