Year: 2015

Every week Gillette puts up a new devotional in the shower for their residents to read. I look forward to these devotionals and am encouraged to hear a new tone in the writings. Last year I was beginning to see common trends in the devotionals that I found somewhat disheartening.  The basic framework to the majority of these devotionals consisted of negative self-talk and God as remedy to this negativity. The devotions, more often than not, understood God as a source of alleviation from day-to-day struggles and pains and saw Him as a reminder to live, think and act more positively. These thoughts or concepts are not wrong, in fact they can be very good, but the commonality of understanding God this way points to a deeper issue.

This cycle, although not as evident on campus (so far) is a common way people tend to express their relationship to God. I find this troubling, because it means that people most commonly relate to God not in the spirit of love, but insecurity. This is bound to happen to some degree. We are finite beings and God is infinite, it is only natural and good to go to Him for refuge. That being said, spiritualizing these insecurities and remaining hyper-sensitive to the pains of existence can deeply shape how one interacts with God.  One may deeply love God, but reflection on His truths will be tainted by a desire to feel relieved of frustrating grievances.  

I am deeply skeptical that this kind of reflection brings lasting peace. God undoubtedly involves human beings in His affairs. The Bible is filled with narratives in which God works through men and women to accomplish His purposes. Emotion is also a part of worship and relationship. The Bible contains writings where individuals, such as David, Jeremiah and Habbukuk, communicate to God using their emotional faculties. The problem does not rest purely in emotion, but the tendency to resort to emotionalism. The problem arises when one’s definition of God is inextricably linked to their emotional experiences. When this definition is used as a starting point the God of the universe is reduced to a being whose prime purpose is to supplement His creation’s emotional health. God becomes a coping mechanism and the art of theology and the pursuit to understand God as an independent and perfect identity is polluted.

It is incredibly easy to spiritualize emotionalism and yet the Christian faith encourages us to look outside ourselves. The Christian faith understands God as a personal and loving parent-figure. The bible has no problem acknowledging that God is our helper in the times of need– and yet God is much more. The modern tendency to construe God as a being inside a subjective reality, as a feel-good experience, is not a role that the Christian God wants to fill. Rather, Christ wants objective authority and He invites His followers to worship His divinity with this sense of reverence.  

As followers of Christ we do not relate to God on the basis of our insecurity or personal dilemma, but on the knowledge that He is God. This act of knowing God is what opens us to the faculties of personal and perfect love and it is the knowledge of perfect love that erodes the fear and anxieties that so deeply entrench our personal conflicts and lives.  I am incredibly encouraged by Luke Rosamilia’s opinion piece last week and the Gillette shower devotions thus far, because I see it as evidence of Houghton students who recognize the temptation to interpret God purely through their emotions and are choosing to have a holistic concept of who God is to us and who God is in His being– and I’m confident that this type of reflection will bring peace.

Let’s get uncomfortable for a minute. Pornography. Wikipedia defines it as “the portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexual arousal”, and (though it’s Wikipedia) that’s clear enough for me. With the widespread reach of the internet, pornography has become incredibly pervasive. If you’ve never seen it, you’re in the American minority. 9/10 boys and 6/10 girls have seen porn before they turn 18. With the knowledge that so many Americans have seen (and regularly watch) porn, it is insane that I never hear anyone talking about it! Pornography is hugely widespread and problematic in many ways, and we need to speak up.

Arguably the most important problem that needs to be addressed is this: porn is a multi-billion dollar industry that profits by exploiting men and women worldwide and it is largely an industry made up of human trafficking. In the United States, the primary cause of human trafficking is for sex, including pornography acting. In many cases, porn actors have no escape from their sexual career, largely because of the economic and social difficulties of moving on. Even in cases where actors and actresses intentionally choose to join the industry, they are often horribly mistreated by those they work for and act with. People are treated like objects that can be assigned worth and sold as visual pieces to a viewer’s sexual fulfillment puzzle. Among actors and actresses in the industry, there is an incredibly high rate of substance abuse and sexually transmitted diseases. The way people are treated in the pornography industry is unacceptable, and needs to stop.

Another huge issue related to porn is addiction. Regular exposure to sexually explicit imagery changes the brain in ways similar to hardcore drugs, not to mention the many ways it confuses viewers and causes them to forget or misunderstand normal sexual interaction and healthy intimacy. Porn distorts sexuality, damages relationships, and confuses one’s understanding of healthy gender interactions, all the while setting up chemical pathways in the brain that draw viewers back for more.  It is amazing that we stay so quiet about this, especially given the probability that there are many among us addicted to porn. Among Christians who are willing to answer questions about their histories with porn, 64% of men reported that they view porn at least once a month, along with 15% of women. If we as a church want to help those around us to be free from this harmful addiction, we need to model that freedom first.

In case nobody has told you yet: porn use is a form of sexual immorality. Galatians 5 tells us, “Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality… I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” Our hope in Christ is a hope of righteousness and purity, and we cannot neglect sexual purity along the way.

It is clear that pornography is an issue of mental health, human rights, economic justice, and moral purity. And yet, porn addiction is hidden and kept secret. Occasionally, when it is talked about, it is often normalized. But pornography is not normal or okay, no matter how many people use it.

Church, please talk about it. Houghton, please talk about it. Christians, rise up about it! This problem will not go away with silence. Let’s start with ourselves. James 5 says, “Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working.” Let’s begin with healing each other, and then let the world know the freedom they can have in Christ.

There is freedom for sexual slaves, who are separated from anyone who loves them, and who are treated like dirt. There is freedom for addicts, whose minds, bodies, and relationships are broken. There is freedom to be a part of the Kingdom of God, but only if we address this, and do it in Jesus’ name.

All statistics and research are from Covenant Eyes. If you’re addicted to porn, check out Fight the New Drug’s “Fortify Program”, an online pornography addiction recovery program.

The future is not what it used to be. Many of us mourn the fact that we might just be too late in addressing the disruptive and destructive future outcomes of the environmental and industrial decisions we have been making. The ice caps are melting and the time to act just may have been 50 years ago. Nothing we can do now will reverse this process. All we can do is hold on and watch to see just how bad this is going to be. Like the bumper sticker says “at least the WAR on the environment is going well”.

I attended the Town meeting held on September 16th in the CFTA recital hall, a venue way too large for the few who attended. This meeting was for the town and campus–the “community”–to weigh in with concerns over the college’s intention to harvest trees from the college’s wooded property. The presentation was made under the description of Stewardship of our natural resources.  The opening slide used a Bible verse to set the proper tone of just how caregiving this task force was inspired to be as they thoughtfully and prayerfully consider the best way to manage this important natural resource of the school. “Proper care of the forest today will help a future forest to better prosper”.  

I stated  publically that although I understood the explanation, I doubted that this alone was our reason for wanting to turn trees into lumber…I suspect that the real reason is  money… “there is money in them thar trees and we are foolish to let them die before we get the profit.”  It was explained by the professional forester we hired that we have before us a situation of future devastation. The trees in our forest have too much common age. The canopy is too dense and the younger trees trying to grow to displace the older growth are being destroyed by more aggressive “undesirable growth”.  The deer are too manifold and eating the tender good trees.  

But the money side of the evening continues to bother me. At the meeting,  I kept thinking why this issue? There are so many resources at the college that need attention. It cost money to hire a consultant. The college has very tight resources. There is just no way we are going to address this issue if there is not some immediate payoff  for the investment.  All the arguments for the future might have some truth to them, but I still feel the real reason we are looking to our forest is for its value as lumber money, not as an inherently valuable natural  resource.

I am not hypocritical enough to try and pass myself off as a purist on these issues. I buy lumber for art projects. I live in home partly carved out the very forest I treasure. Line up the observations and you will find me two-faced on them all. But I do want to make the case that the damage that is going to be done to our most beautiful natural resource will come at a cost to us in the present. When I pointed out the recent logging done by the Western District of the Wesleyan church of the part of the forest that runs along the edge of the college property, the forester emphasized that this was done not by a forester, but by a logger. “Don’t confuse forestry with logging”. Ok…but that sounds a little like a barber saying “It’s not me that cuts the hair, it’s the scissors”. Loggers cut trees marked by foresters. Yes, there are terrible loggers and there are environmentally responsible loggers. My hunch is that there is also a cost differential here that I doubt will be persuasive enough when cut comes to chopping that we will choose  wisely.  

It looks to me like there is not any way to change the mind of the college about this proposal. Thus, I am asking the students, faculty, and staff who care about the college forest to do the following:

Weigh in on this proposal. Insist that the people making these decisions do so with the least disruptive and most responsible means possible. Perhaps this will mean hiring the Amish to use horses rather than huge ground-destroying equipment to get the lumber.

Insist that we also hire an outside agency that is not trained only to look upon forest as lumber farms, but to see them in other environmentally focused terms. With an aesthetic eye and not one that describes lumber-lacking growth as junk trees but sees other ways in which the woods might be fine if left to go its own evolutionary direction…whatever that might be.

That a promise is made to carefully guard against harvesting trees on the borders of property other than the college and that those parts of the woods used now for recreation be the least harvested-meaning the ropes course, the paths and trails, and those parts most visible as we walk, run and recreate in this great natural resource.

That the harvesting happens in winter so that the noise and disruption will be least impactful on the forest use- leave ski trails open and safe.

That we also take into account the damage that might occur to other sensitive environmental habitats. That tree values be weighed against the value of salamanders, woodpeckers, and biodiversity.

Have the college only  hire people that will promise this in writing and make it legally binding to not walk away from the woods once the trees are gone and to not leave it like a forest looks after artillery shells have devastated an enemy embankment.

I will feel better if more people have a chance to consider what was proposed at the town hall meeting.  I am, by my own public admission, a tree hugger. I also believe that the arguments about taking care of the forest today for a future tomorrow are valid.
If we decide to still do this (I wish we would not) …how we do it is critical.  The mature trees that are surely going to die out need middle growth and younger trees to be healthy and have a future.