It’s no secret that during that last three years, I was undergoing a shift of personal spiritual practice and beliefs. It’s not that I no longer believe in The Bible, it’s more that I’ve expanded my approach of how I study and apply the reading of it in my life. Even when I was active in my past churches, I’ve always questioned the validity of what was taught. I looked at the history and compared Scripture to other forms of Holy doctrines, looking for similarities rather than dwelling on the differences. After all, if focusing on the differences created the world we currently live in now, how is that working for us?
What I’ve been studying has been called many different names: New Thought, New Thought Christianity, (hey, they needed to sub-categorize “New Thought”) Practical Christianity, Christian Metaphysics, Metaphysical Christianity, and simply “Truth” with a capital ‘T.’ The three main branches of New Thought are Unity, Divine Science, and Religious Science. Divine Science dwindled out over the years since its inception back in 1888, and both Unity and Religious Science underwent a “branding makeover” within the last five years. Hence my confusion upon taking research into their teachings. Both changed their name to “Spiritual Center” or “Center of Spiritual Living.” As a whole, they eliminated “Church” in their name. So hypothetically, what was once a “Unity Church of Oakland” would become a “Unity Spiritual Center of Oakland.” (I use this example because there’s no such place in Oakland; what was once a Unity of Oakland is now Lakeside Temple of Practical Christianity)
I attend a Unity Church located in Castro Valley, California. They have still kept the name “Unity Church” as the minister there was not “qualified” to participate in the (re)branding process. Their bylaws, mostly unchanged since the inception of the church stated purpose was to create a “healing ministry to perpetuate and teach Practical Christianity as taught by The Unity School of Practical Christianity.” I suppose that one of a possible loophole to change that is the fact that there’s no longer such an institution called “Unity School of Practical Christianity.” This was part of the branding process to rename them from USPC to “Unity Institute.” Prior to that, I visited several renamed “Unity Spiritual Centers” throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. To say I left those locations confused was an understatement.
I was introduced to New Thought in 1995, or even earlier than that. It really depends on whether or not you feel that the personal development industry is part of New Thought. If so, then I was introduced to aspect of it back in 1993, otherwise it was when I bought a book called Transform Your Life by Barbara L. King in May of 1995. At that time, I began to attend church and really did not know how to read my Bible. That book helped me transition from attending marketing and personal growth seminars to church life. Because the church I attended at the time was more mainstream and evangelical and because the book was a New Thought book, I was discouraged from studying the book further.
From 1995 onwards, church life was an important part of my life. That was until 2005 when my mother passed away. Then it felt as if the ground was taken from underneath me. I still attended church, but I found myself bouncing around from one church to the other.
Eventually in 2007 I contacted another personal development group and went on one of their retreats. Then I was introduced to another personal development teacher who recommended another and then another until one of those instructors shared a recommended reading list. The reading list included a book by Eric Butterworth called Discover The Power Within You. After reading that book, I looked for other books by Butterworth. Then it was books by Catherine Ponder. Then it was Emmet Fox. After reading their author’s bio in their respective books, I kept seeing “Unity,” so that’s when I decided to visit a Unity “Church.” So here I was visiting these “Unity CENTERS” and inquiring about books by those authors. One specific bookstore located in the “center” never heard of those authors, and the person working there never knew who Charles Fillmore was which meant books written by them were obviously not available. I was then asked if I was interested in purchasing any books written by Abraham Hicks.
Throughout the years of attending New Thought centers beginning in 2011, I found myself attempting to participate as much as possible with the activities sponsored by the centers. Little did I know, I was actually drifting away from what caught my attention when I read the works of the aforementioned authors. First off, one of the Unity Centers held a weekly Oneness Blessing in lieu of a mid-week study group. I initially attended that on a regular basis throughout 2011 and 2012. It was just that the group was more clique-ish than other past mainstream churches who left a sour taste in my mouth when I visited them. Another time was visiting a Unity center who hosted a self-proclaimed “shaman” as a guest speaker for their Sunday service. If I were to visit a Unity location on a Sunday, they usually open up with a “we honor all the many paths to God,” so I waited patiently for that moment where someone, hopefully the minister and/or spiritual leader, to share a message consistent with the teachings of Fillmore, Butterworth, Ponder, or Emmet Fox even though he was a Divine Science minister. The closest semblance to anything Unity was the reading of The Daily Word. During those times, I was beginning to conclude that I was attending a Unitarian or there was another denomination named Unity.
After familiarizing myself with the writings of Ponder, Fillmore, Butterworth, and Fox, I began to inquire about taking courses from The Unity School of Practical Christianity. I learned that the program I was interested in no longer existed and that they were no longer Unity School of Practical Christianity. I corresponded with the admissions director briefly stating the reason why I was interested in taking the program that they just eliminated. I expressed interest in teaching Practical Christianity in Oakland and in Singapore. I inquired about the change and why they were no longer School of Practical Christianity. The director not only eluded to answer the question, but he made a random comment that Seicho No Ie (I didn't know what Seicho No Ie was at that time) is based out of Japan. At that point I lost all interest in taking any courses from Unity.
I didn’t think finding a location to teach what was taught by the older New Thought authors would be such a challenge. It was. My initial impression of the New Thought centers that I visited was that anything goes regarding the Sunday message and center teachings so long as the bookstore has an inventory of those authors with the exception of that one Unity bookstore who had never heard of any of the authors I mentioned. I contacted several Unity Practical Christianity churches who were still listed as a church on their respective websites. Their responses were somewhat curt and it seemed that they didn’t want to be bothered as I had no intention of visiting their location since they were normally located outside of California.
I started blogging about my confusion and frustration while continuing to purchase and study books. Someone contacted me on my blog that if I was looking to study Practical Christianity, she suggested contacting the Universal Foundation for Better Living, which I later found out that they were once a Unity organization. Shortly afterwards, I learned they were the link between Dr Barbara L King and Unity. Actually that “link” was the founder, Johnnie Colemon.
Eventually towards the end of 2011, I came across the Unity Castro Valley website. I wasn’t sure if I wanted to visit there since I lived all the way out in Daly City which was about a 45 minute drive away, and I didn’t want to go all the way there just to leave disappointed. Luckily for me, the sermons (they still called their messages “sermons”) were transcribed and provided for on their website. There was a reference to The Bible, quotes from one of the instructors I taken a course from (Debbie Ford), Charles Fillmore, and Eric Butterworth. I visited them that next Sunday. Upon arrival, I realized I was one of the youngest attendee, and everyone there knew each other because the attendance averaged 12-15 regulars.
What exactly appealed to me about New Thought as opposed to the former theological paradigm that I followed for years? First off, “God out there” versus “God within.” Secondly, the concept of practicing and learning the form of spirituality that Jesus taught and practiced himself versus the whole notion of a doctrine and dogma that instead worships Jesus. (Quick note on that object of worship: Notice that in the New Testament, only one entity other than God said to worship him and it wasn’t Jesus.) Another appeal is that it focuses on the “here and now” as opposed to the “pie in the sky” afterlife. Lastly, what appealed to me most was the notion that humanity was “created in the image and likeness of God,” so we all possess an inner Divine Christ-self(which is the first description of man in Genesis) as opposed to the “miserable sinner, saved by grace” notion as espoused by the mainstream Christians.
So if one of the main premises of New Thought is this inner Divinity of humanity, then so long as we practice what Jesus taught, then we should be doing “even greater works” than Jesus. People would often read and look for cryptic messages from The Bible. If anything, the concept of “God within” has so many Biblical “hints,” many by Jesus himself, but go further back to Moses when Moses asked God what he should call God. Remember God’s response? “I AM.” What was the first thing said in the 10 Commandments? “I AM.” What got the Pharisees motivated to put a contract on Jesus? “I AM.”
I bring this up because after attending different Unity centers for several years, I’ve observed a few things that caused me to step back and pause for a moment. I stated I once regularly participated in the Oneness Blessing at one of the Unity centers, and about a year ago, I took a one-day course on how to give a “Wholeness Blessing.” Over the course of attending Unity and Centers for Spiritual Living, I’ve participated in sound bowl healing, angel therapy, the aforementioned blessings, reading material from people who channel, and lastly, preparing myself for the 2012 Mayan Calendar conclusion. All were under the guise of the “many paths to God” proclamation, and therefore, the materials were accepted as “compatible” with the Unity and other New Thought teachings.
REALLY???
As I take a closer look at all the peripheral teachings, I have to ask one question: if I’m Divinely created in the Image of God, and therefore have all attributes of God, at which point can I choose out of participating in those teachings and rely upon my own Divine nature? Let’s go back to that incident where I visited that Unity bookstore where the person was promoting the sale of the Abraham Hicks books. I know that many people benefitted from Abraham’s wisdom and insights and have transformed their lives as a result, including those who attend services at their respective New Thought centers on a regular basis. But that’s the paradox. We attend New Thought service to learn to connect with our inner Divine God self within. (In many cases for those like myself, we're really “UN-LEARNING” past dogma) So for those who keep leaning on Abraham, Sri Bhagavan, or Archangel _____, when will you learn to lean on you? YOUR I AM? YOUR Inner Divine Christ? I do not question whether or not someone benefited from participating, but think about this: has it ever occurred to folks who attend New Thought centers and see declining attendance numbers that the reason for those declining numbers is perhaps there aren’t enough people going within to their own Divinity and relying more on these supposed “complimentary teachings?” Has anyone ever made that connection, thought that such a connection is possible, or is that too much of a sacred “cash cow” for some of those centers?
I don’t know much about the branding process that both Unity and Religious Science underwent other than the confusion that I personally endured as I looked for locations committed to teaching what I became interested in learning. Since I don't study very much Ernest Holmes material other than sections of the Science of Mind Textbook, I’m less familiar with the process Religious Science underwent as they transformed into The Center for Spiritual Living. As for Unity, based on what was initially taught and the materials used, the change was more of an eyebrow raiser. My take on this situation: Not only is Inner Divine Christ taught at Unity and in New Thought in general, (for some New Thought branches, even when they take the “Jesus” and “Christ” out, the core teaching is still there) another Universal law taught is The “Law of Attraction.” The Law of Attraction wasn’t some theory made-up by the New Thought authors, it was simply explained more thoroughly. After all, Universal Law is timeless. Contrary to mainstream Christian dogma, LOA IS taught in the Bible. It just wasn’t called “Law of Attraction.” What does all this have to do with the branding process? Well around 2005-07 with the success of independent films like The Secret, and What the Bleep Do We Know, the Law of Attraction became en vogue not only in the States, but worldwide. The personal development industry received a spike in demand, and all of the sudden, Law of Attraction Wealth Building, New Age, urban shamans, and energy healing gurus came out of the woodwork. Oh and speaking of “New Age,” please note: (Mainstream Christians I’m talking to you especially)
NEW AGE IS NOT NEW THOUGHT AND VICE VERSA
(Then again, I shouldn’t single out just mainstream Christians with that statement. I take that back. Not just mainstream Christians, but New Agers who feel entitled that the New Thought centers they attend OWE them a space and forum)
Anyhow, going back to what I was talking about. So because of the popularity of The Secret and this sudden mini-renaissance of old New Thought authors who focused on applying spiritual principles to material wealth and business, guess who wanted to ride that wave of new-found popularity? Yup, our beloved New Thought centers! They just made one fatal mistake in all this: instead of appealing to the public that The Secret is a part of New Thought teachings, they attempted to squeeze all of New Thought into the package of The Secret. I likened the situation of how New Thought criticized mainstream Christianity about appealing to a “God out there” versus to the “God within,” and getting things reversed. This branding process seemed to reverse things.
I spent the last fifteen years working on my acting craft and twenty-five plus years in traditional Chinese martial arts and lion dancing. What I learned from both performing arts is the importance of really cementing the basic fundamental foundation. It get’s hammered over and over. In acting, it’s about developing voice, awareness, and bodily movement. In martial arts and lion dancing, it’s about stance work. Fancy blocking and punching combos are ineffective if the stance isn’t developed. Likewise, entering a New Thought facility with an expectation of learning the fundamentals of New Thought teaching should be a given and not something to catch the center's spiritual leader off guard. Are you an initiate of a shaman located in Costa Rica? Congratulations. Are you a Reiki healer? That’s great; I practice a hard form of hay gung.(qi gong) You graduated from Oneness University? Welcome back to the United States. Are you a certified A Course in Miracles instructor? Great, I enjoyed the film Admissions. The bottom line is that if a person were to read material from Fillmore, Fox,(yes, he's Divine Science) Butterworth, or Cady and decide to attend a Sunday service hosted by a New Thought center such as Unity, and the presentation was based on shamanism, energy healing, angel therapy, or even ACIM, wouldn't they leave questioning themselves whether or not they visited the correct location?
I met this lady who visits our Unity church. She attends more than one New Thought center within her location and decides which service to attend based on the bulletin announcement of what is going to be presented at future services. She explained that whenever a church or center announces a "guest speaker," she found herself weary of attending because in most cases the guest would discuss or present something other than New Thought. She even shared that if she didn't feel confident enough that the locations nearby her would present something consistent with New Thought, she'd go to the local Christian Science service because she knows that she'll receive foundation block teachings.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to not teach such materials. I'm saying that to hold a Oneness Blessing in lieu of a mid-week service is a detriment to your congregants. If you hold a Sunday school during church or after church service, the topics should be Biblically based, or at the very least, based on one of the New Thought authors and/or their teachings. Sunday school should not be a forum to hold a crystal energy healing workshop, a moon and sun energetic shift consciousness course, an in-depth Abraham Hicks study, or Reiki sessions. If you choose to provide a space or forum for such materials to be presented, then do so; hey, you could even include it in the church bulletin and announcements, but in no way should that be an official church or center sanctioned event.
Lastly, please don't throw any of the pioneering teachers and authors of New Thought under a metaphorical bus. Even as a newcomer, whenever an announcement is made about learning the latest and greatest energetic spiritual zapping modality, and the presenter makes some sort of comment that "if Fillmore or Butterworth were still alive, they'd approve of this," I can smell the inconsistent-incongruent B.S.
07 June, 2014
23 April, 2014
Why I No Longer Identify Myself as Christian
Now before anyone gets all butt-hurt and bent out of shape, hear me out. This has been a long time coming since 2000. My spiritual life has always been and always will be an ongoing evolving process as it should be.
During a Campus Crusade for Christ meeting at CSU Hayward, I found myself in heated discussions with the members to where it eventually became an unofficial pissing contest of who read The Bible from cover to cover the most and/or who served whom under what capacity or who could retain the most memorized verses from Scripture. One of those heated discussion was after an email was forwarded and shared from a supposed member of Wedgewood Baptist Church which had been the scene of a mass church shooting. I objected to the 8-12 printed pages read aloud to the group as the list of prayer request had excluded the perpetrator, Larry Gene Ashbrook and the surviving members of his family. I attempted to quote from Romans 12 about praying and blessing those who persecute, and because I was unable to quote word-for-word verbatim, I was accused of not knowing what I was talking about. Then the leader began to quote different Bible verses in a taunting manner after he singled me out in front of the entire group that I needed to "fast" (go w/o food) for 2 days. I told him that back then I did have a fasting practice. He then quoted another verse about "known by the fruits," and that I "lacked fruit." At that point the temptation to outdo Ashbrook toward that group passed through my mind. That was back in 1999-2000.
Actually those years from 1998 through 2011 had been nothing short of tumultuous regarding church life. The rare years of growth and stability (for those of you who adhere to the belief that “growth” and “stability” cannot co-exist, I’m referring to “stability,” meaning I didn't want to knock the living crap out of people at church and beyond) existed from 2000 through the middle of 2005 thanks in large part to both mentors Peter and “Dr. Dave.” That and therapist Dr Wyatt enabled me to experience “grace” as defined in The Bible. Once Venture ministry began to deteriorate in the aftermath of the migration of Dr. Dave and Peter to a church in Austin, (Summer of 2005, when my mom passed) I began a journey of spiritual instability, or what The Journey’s Pastor Chris Brady described as being a “spiritual orphan.”
In Pastor Chris’ eyes and amongst many Christians, not having an official membership with a local church body isn’t just being a “spiritual orphan,” but is considered a “sin.” Take a closer look at the church’s financial reliance on stable membership and membership tithing. Could that be a reason why the pastor would declare “sin” for someone who doesn’t declare membership? I recall being at a church service in Singapore where it was learned by the prayer minister that I wasn’t a member of any church back home in the States nor in Singapore. The minister offered to pray for my “sinfulness.” I was offended and shared my dismay with my Singaporean Sis, Jojo who defended his declaration. I shouldn't be offended by a church where their leader's official title is "Apostle." (I've honestly slipped and referred to him as "Impostor" on occasion. Of course that was prevalent after the said incident. Passive aggressive behavior? Whoops, my bad!) That’s when I learned that it was considered a “sin” to not have a church membership.
I’ve extensively ranted and lamented on how a Christian organization like The Salvation Army operated to the point where I was convinced that I experienced some PTSD symptoms during the Holidays when I heard the bell ringing outside the stores. It saddened me to see people who loved God and wanted to serve God become so jaded after serving in the capacity as an officer (pastoral level) for The Salvation Army. It was more disheartening to witness those who left their respected position, alienated, shunned, and/or ridiculed by current members and staff of The Salvation Army. Yet every Holiday Season, they put forth a do-gooder image. I considered them as a foundational building block to my spiritual life, yet when it was all said and done, I find myself currently having to unlearn, let-go, and forgive them. Amongst some of their practices to unlearn was their “Self-Denial” campaign which reinforces a scarcity mentality. The concept is to “self-deny” a regular item (like coffee, or meals) and donate the proceeds from not purchasing such item(s) to charity. (i.e. The Salvation Army) For example under the campaign, my daily coffee during the workweek is $3 a day, Monday through Fridays. That’s $15 a week. So let’s say the “Self Denial” campaign is a 6-week program, so at $15 a week for 6 weeks, at the end of the campaign, I’m expected to donate an amount of $90 because I abstained from purchasing coffee during those 6 weeks. In other words the campaign reinforces the false belief that in order for someone to have something, I must give up or “sacrifice” something in order for them to receive. From a theological standpoint, the program, which is a common practice in The Salvation Army, teaches and reinforces that there is no abundance.
If we are truly created “in the image and likeness of God” as Genesis 1:26-27, then why was/is it necessary to “accept Jesus as Lord and Savior,” AKA “The Sinner’s Prayer?” The church that led me in that prayer while I was a 3rd grader, was a Chinese based church ran by a senior pastor who was of Native American and white descent. He laid down the “fire and brimstone” over the “sinful” nature of “Chinese culture.” He laid down the “fire and brimstone” against “sexual immorality and impurity.” Little did we know that he had an Asian fetish. He was into underaged Chinese girls. You see, that church eventually expanded into a private Christian school “serving the needs” of the Chinese East Bay Christian community. What eventually came out was that their “beloved” pastor profiled and targeted specific female students of that school. The girls singled out were students of the school, who was known to have specific challenges at home, and whose parents hardly knew a lick of English. He'd call those girls in from class for "pastoral counseling." Unfortunately when this came to light and past students came forward, members of that church blamed the girls and defended the pastor. Quite frankly, I don't think that pastor got his just due consequences for his actions.
Others split from that church not because of the scandal itself, but because of their eventual choice of selecting a replacement senior pastor who was of Chinese descent. Yes, this was/is a church serving the Chinese community. It was just that the sentiment amongst specific Chinese Christians is that they feel “better led” by a “more Christian” leader. (ie, WHITE) It’s unfortunate but American Christians while ministering to people of color, tend to “culture-shame” those community members they’re supposedly “serving and saving.” I’ve voiced my piece regarding that in light of the Rick Warren incident when he publicly demeaned and performed an offensive caricature of Asians while a certain contingency of defenders including those cultured shamed Asians came out of the woodworks. I described such a group on my blog as “Asian House Negroes.” Either God so loved the world, or God doesn’t. And the last time I checked, “the world” included every nationality, every culture, so this culture-shaming done “in the Name of God” needs to be stopped “By Any Means Necessary.” (Another advantage of not identifying myself as a so-called Christian is the freedom TO CHOOSE and identify Malcolm X as a true to life prophet!)
What I’m unable to figure out and wrap around my head is the premise of our U.S. Constitution regarding “separation of Church and State.” Is it a “two-way” street, meaning the State must allow autonomy for the religious institutions and not have any control over them, and likewise the religious institution and leaders must allow the state to be run without religious interference? If that’d be the case, then this whole notion about legally defining marriages should be mute. In a democracy, let the voters decide. End of story. What sickens me is seeing religious institutions, mostly Christians, placing curses and public backlashes against the government for functioning as it was designed to function. On the other end of the spectrum, the left condemns the religious groups for the self perceived lack of intolerance, yet they display zero to no tolerance for those who openly expresses their own personal beliefs. Case in point, the recent resignation of the Mozilla Firefox CEO Brenden Eich is the most current example of tolerance hypocrisy. As long as the CEO was not creating policy or influencing company policy based on his own personal beliefs, who or what he voted for and supported politically is none of anyone’s damn business. OK Cupids overstepping of their boundaries makes them appear like some entitled piece of crap pretentious intolerant hypocrites. Does their dating service actually work? I wouldn't know since I chose not to give them a fuckin dime.
Speaking of “Church and State,” here’s my other main sentiment of my decision to no longer identify my spirituality as “Christian.” The premise, foundational, doctrinal basic beliefs of the mainstream Christian Catholic and Protestant denominations are based on 7 religious councils. The first two Councils: Nicaea in 325 CE and Constantinople in 381 CE were sponsored by Constantine himself. You cannot convince me that he did not have a hand on the decision making process. I’m supposed to base my entire spiritual belief, life, and practice based on a set of standards that was voted for, and decided by a group who were influenced by a political leader with his own selfish personal and political agenda??? Bull-fucken-shit! I’m supposed to base my faith, connect with and condemn other people based on whether or not they agree or disagree with that premise? On top of everything else, one of the first premise agreed upon on all 7 councils was the authority placed upon the canonical scriptures, which during those council sessions, was hand-picked and interpreted accordingly. Yet, through inaccurate translations and interpretations over the last 1800 years and different languages, I’m expected to take it as absolute law. That’s why I have more than one translation of The Bible. That's why I've been opened to reading other holy canons from other faiths like The Upanishads, or studying materials like Rumi. That’s why I question everything told to me through someone who was appointed by someone else as some sort of authority on what The Bible means. Hell, even the New Thought based theology that I’ve embraced and accepted these past three years goes under my own personal scrutiny. I no longer blindly accept something at face value solely because the person in the pulpit or the person who wrote the last NY Times best seller told me so.
So call me a hypocrite or ironic or paradoxical. Hell, call me a heretic. I'm choosing to educate the masses on New Though theology with my decision to study and submitting myself for ministerial candidacy in the New Thought institutions. Being accused as a heretic and a hell bound cult leader comes with the territory.
One of the main organization in New Thought is undergoing a debate/crossroad at the moment of whether or not to continue to identify themselves as a “Christian” organization. You would think that with the title of this posting and because of my interest in candidacy, I’d opt for them to drop the Christian label. Ironically, I'm actually against it. You see the way they have it set up, if they were to do such a procedure, they’d drop all their earlier fundamental teachings that established themselves in the first place. In other words, study materials and practices that their founders and their more famous figures within that organization created and shared would be dropped along with the label. Or those materials (studying) would merely be presented as a footnote. (Classic case of an example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater) As of now, New Thought, or Practical Christianity is presented with the materials of how to study, interpret and apply the Bible in a way that they differentiate between practicing a form of spirituality that Jesus practiced versus following a form of spirituality or religion that worships Jesus. If practicing and studying the form of spirituality that Jesus practiced and taught is the definition of a Christian, then yes, I identify myself as that. However in the proposal of dropping the Christian label, even that becomes more in the background and afterthought while embracing a smorgasbord of different religious and spiritual practices that’s presented more in the forefront. I wouldn’t identify myself as that either. If it was Jesus’ intent to “make disciples,” then logically speaking, it makes more sense to practice the form of spirituality that Jesus taught and practiced rather than practice a religion pieced together by councils that met hundreds of years after Jesus graced this planet. Unfortunately, those who practice the latter are identified as “Christians” and hence my reservations of choosing to be in that same category.
Besides...
If Jesus himself wasn’t a Christian, why should I be?
During a Campus Crusade for Christ meeting at CSU Hayward, I found myself in heated discussions with the members to where it eventually became an unofficial pissing contest of who read The Bible from cover to cover the most and/or who served whom under what capacity or who could retain the most memorized verses from Scripture. One of those heated discussion was after an email was forwarded and shared from a supposed member of Wedgewood Baptist Church which had been the scene of a mass church shooting. I objected to the 8-12 printed pages read aloud to the group as the list of prayer request had excluded the perpetrator, Larry Gene Ashbrook and the surviving members of his family. I attempted to quote from Romans 12 about praying and blessing those who persecute, and because I was unable to quote word-for-word verbatim, I was accused of not knowing what I was talking about. Then the leader began to quote different Bible verses in a taunting manner after he singled me out in front of the entire group that I needed to "fast" (go w/o food) for 2 days. I told him that back then I did have a fasting practice. He then quoted another verse about "known by the fruits," and that I "lacked fruit." At that point the temptation to outdo Ashbrook toward that group passed through my mind. That was back in 1999-2000.
Actually those years from 1998 through 2011 had been nothing short of tumultuous regarding church life. The rare years of growth and stability (for those of you who adhere to the belief that “growth” and “stability” cannot co-exist, I’m referring to “stability,” meaning I didn't want to knock the living crap out of people at church and beyond) existed from 2000 through the middle of 2005 thanks in large part to both mentors Peter and “Dr. Dave.” That and therapist Dr Wyatt enabled me to experience “grace” as defined in The Bible. Once Venture ministry began to deteriorate in the aftermath of the migration of Dr. Dave and Peter to a church in Austin, (Summer of 2005, when my mom passed) I began a journey of spiritual instability, or what The Journey’s Pastor Chris Brady described as being a “spiritual orphan.”
In Pastor Chris’ eyes and amongst many Christians, not having an official membership with a local church body isn’t just being a “spiritual orphan,” but is considered a “sin.” Take a closer look at the church’s financial reliance on stable membership and membership tithing. Could that be a reason why the pastor would declare “sin” for someone who doesn’t declare membership? I recall being at a church service in Singapore where it was learned by the prayer minister that I wasn’t a member of any church back home in the States nor in Singapore. The minister offered to pray for my “sinfulness.” I was offended and shared my dismay with my Singaporean Sis, Jojo who defended his declaration. I shouldn't be offended by a church where their leader's official title is "Apostle." (I've honestly slipped and referred to him as "Impostor" on occasion. Of course that was prevalent after the said incident. Passive aggressive behavior? Whoops, my bad!) That’s when I learned that it was considered a “sin” to not have a church membership.
I’ve extensively ranted and lamented on how a Christian organization like The Salvation Army operated to the point where I was convinced that I experienced some PTSD symptoms during the Holidays when I heard the bell ringing outside the stores. It saddened me to see people who loved God and wanted to serve God become so jaded after serving in the capacity as an officer (pastoral level) for The Salvation Army. It was more disheartening to witness those who left their respected position, alienated, shunned, and/or ridiculed by current members and staff of The Salvation Army. Yet every Holiday Season, they put forth a do-gooder image. I considered them as a foundational building block to my spiritual life, yet when it was all said and done, I find myself currently having to unlearn, let-go, and forgive them. Amongst some of their practices to unlearn was their “Self-Denial” campaign which reinforces a scarcity mentality. The concept is to “self-deny” a regular item (like coffee, or meals) and donate the proceeds from not purchasing such item(s) to charity. (i.e. The Salvation Army) For example under the campaign, my daily coffee during the workweek is $3 a day, Monday through Fridays. That’s $15 a week. So let’s say the “Self Denial” campaign is a 6-week program, so at $15 a week for 6 weeks, at the end of the campaign, I’m expected to donate an amount of $90 because I abstained from purchasing coffee during those 6 weeks. In other words the campaign reinforces the false belief that in order for someone to have something, I must give up or “sacrifice” something in order for them to receive. From a theological standpoint, the program, which is a common practice in The Salvation Army, teaches and reinforces that there is no abundance.
If we are truly created “in the image and likeness of God” as Genesis 1:26-27, then why was/is it necessary to “accept Jesus as Lord and Savior,” AKA “The Sinner’s Prayer?” The church that led me in that prayer while I was a 3rd grader, was a Chinese based church ran by a senior pastor who was of Native American and white descent. He laid down the “fire and brimstone” over the “sinful” nature of “Chinese culture.” He laid down the “fire and brimstone” against “sexual immorality and impurity.” Little did we know that he had an Asian fetish. He was into underaged Chinese girls. You see, that church eventually expanded into a private Christian school “serving the needs” of the Chinese East Bay Christian community. What eventually came out was that their “beloved” pastor profiled and targeted specific female students of that school. The girls singled out were students of the school, who was known to have specific challenges at home, and whose parents hardly knew a lick of English. He'd call those girls in from class for "pastoral counseling." Unfortunately when this came to light and past students came forward, members of that church blamed the girls and defended the pastor. Quite frankly, I don't think that pastor got his just due consequences for his actions.
Others split from that church not because of the scandal itself, but because of their eventual choice of selecting a replacement senior pastor who was of Chinese descent. Yes, this was/is a church serving the Chinese community. It was just that the sentiment amongst specific Chinese Christians is that they feel “better led” by a “more Christian” leader. (ie, WHITE) It’s unfortunate but American Christians while ministering to people of color, tend to “culture-shame” those community members they’re supposedly “serving and saving.” I’ve voiced my piece regarding that in light of the Rick Warren incident when he publicly demeaned and performed an offensive caricature of Asians while a certain contingency of defenders including those cultured shamed Asians came out of the woodworks. I described such a group on my blog as “Asian House Negroes.” Either God so loved the world, or God doesn’t. And the last time I checked, “the world” included every nationality, every culture, so this culture-shaming done “in the Name of God” needs to be stopped “By Any Means Necessary.” (Another advantage of not identifying myself as a so-called Christian is the freedom TO CHOOSE and identify Malcolm X as a true to life prophet!)
What I’m unable to figure out and wrap around my head is the premise of our U.S. Constitution regarding “separation of Church and State.” Is it a “two-way” street, meaning the State must allow autonomy for the religious institutions and not have any control over them, and likewise the religious institution and leaders must allow the state to be run without religious interference? If that’d be the case, then this whole notion about legally defining marriages should be mute. In a democracy, let the voters decide. End of story. What sickens me is seeing religious institutions, mostly Christians, placing curses and public backlashes against the government for functioning as it was designed to function. On the other end of the spectrum, the left condemns the religious groups for the self perceived lack of intolerance, yet they display zero to no tolerance for those who openly expresses their own personal beliefs. Case in point, the recent resignation of the Mozilla Firefox CEO Brenden Eich is the most current example of tolerance hypocrisy. As long as the CEO was not creating policy or influencing company policy based on his own personal beliefs, who or what he voted for and supported politically is none of anyone’s damn business. OK Cupids overstepping of their boundaries makes them appear like some entitled piece of crap pretentious intolerant hypocrites. Does their dating service actually work? I wouldn't know since I chose not to give them a fuckin dime.
Speaking of “Church and State,” here’s my other main sentiment of my decision to no longer identify my spirituality as “Christian.” The premise, foundational, doctrinal basic beliefs of the mainstream Christian Catholic and Protestant denominations are based on 7 religious councils. The first two Councils: Nicaea in 325 CE and Constantinople in 381 CE were sponsored by Constantine himself. You cannot convince me that he did not have a hand on the decision making process. I’m supposed to base my entire spiritual belief, life, and practice based on a set of standards that was voted for, and decided by a group who were influenced by a political leader with his own selfish personal and political agenda??? Bull-fucken-shit! I’m supposed to base my faith, connect with and condemn other people based on whether or not they agree or disagree with that premise? On top of everything else, one of the first premise agreed upon on all 7 councils was the authority placed upon the canonical scriptures, which during those council sessions, was hand-picked and interpreted accordingly. Yet, through inaccurate translations and interpretations over the last 1800 years and different languages, I’m expected to take it as absolute law. That’s why I have more than one translation of The Bible. That's why I've been opened to reading other holy canons from other faiths like The Upanishads, or studying materials like Rumi. That’s why I question everything told to me through someone who was appointed by someone else as some sort of authority on what The Bible means. Hell, even the New Thought based theology that I’ve embraced and accepted these past three years goes under my own personal scrutiny. I no longer blindly accept something at face value solely because the person in the pulpit or the person who wrote the last NY Times best seller told me so.
So call me a hypocrite or ironic or paradoxical. Hell, call me a heretic. I'm choosing to educate the masses on New Though theology with my decision to study and submitting myself for ministerial candidacy in the New Thought institutions. Being accused as a heretic and a hell bound cult leader comes with the territory.
One of the main organization in New Thought is undergoing a debate/crossroad at the moment of whether or not to continue to identify themselves as a “Christian” organization. You would think that with the title of this posting and because of my interest in candidacy, I’d opt for them to drop the Christian label. Ironically, I'm actually against it. You see the way they have it set up, if they were to do such a procedure, they’d drop all their earlier fundamental teachings that established themselves in the first place. In other words, study materials and practices that their founders and their more famous figures within that organization created and shared would be dropped along with the label. Or those materials (studying) would merely be presented as a footnote. (Classic case of an example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater) As of now, New Thought, or Practical Christianity is presented with the materials of how to study, interpret and apply the Bible in a way that they differentiate between practicing a form of spirituality that Jesus practiced versus following a form of spirituality or religion that worships Jesus. If practicing and studying the form of spirituality that Jesus practiced and taught is the definition of a Christian, then yes, I identify myself as that. However in the proposal of dropping the Christian label, even that becomes more in the background and afterthought while embracing a smorgasbord of different religious and spiritual practices that’s presented more in the forefront. I wouldn’t identify myself as that either. If it was Jesus’ intent to “make disciples,” then logically speaking, it makes more sense to practice the form of spirituality that Jesus taught and practiced rather than practice a religion pieced together by councils that met hundreds of years after Jesus graced this planet. Unfortunately, those who practice the latter are identified as “Christians” and hence my reservations of choosing to be in that same category.
Besides...
If Jesus himself wasn’t a Christian, why should I be?
27 November, 2013
Malcolm X's "House Negro vs Field Negro"
Before beginning reading this entry, it's better to listen to Malcolm X's speech before going any further. There's no point reading this posting and not knowing what I'm talking about.
So what does this speech have to do with spirituality? Lots. This is not a pragmatic compare and contrast between conventional Christian versus Islam ideology in the Black Community. This speech was made some 50 years ago, and the majority would argue that this speech is irrelevant now that we have a Black President in office. Not only do I beg to differ, but I want to venture out and say that this isn't only applicable to the African American community, but all ethnic communities of color still being marginalized by White AmeriKKKa.
As a person of Asian descent, I know squarely and clearly that Asians are too divided along the "House" and the "Fields." It's just that the House Asians, (mostly females) didn't just make it into "Master's House" but also into "Master's Bedroom." (Both figuratively and literally)
Wait, so what does this have to do with spirituality?
First off, after the incident involving Pastor Rick Warren, there was a constituent of Asian Christians who protested against the coalition of Asian pastors who demanded/requested a formal apology from Warren. Their response was basically that because Warren has done so much for the Kingdom of God, he has no need to apologize and on top of that, as Christians, the Asian pastors failed in the example by "not forgiving" Warren.
Sickening
Truth be told, not only do Asian House Negros exist in the Christian Church, the Christian Church basically serves as an incubator for the development of AHN. Utilizing the urgency to "save souls" of the "heathen Asian culture," the Church has placed themselves into the position of power by placing an entire community based on their ethnicity and culture to "be saved." Consequently they leave the community of believers with an excessive amount of guilt because of their ethnic and cultural background.
The good news about the Pastor Rick Warren incident is that it sheds light to a problem that no one is willing to talk about.
Actually doesn't have the Cojones to bring up.
One of the strength of Asian ideology (call is Confucianism or Zen, or Tao, whatever) is the fact of the capability to make the best of a situation, flow with it, and be able to adapt with little to no resistance to the situation, regardless of challenges or difficulties that situation presents.
It can be a strength as well as weakness.
Can you see how a community can be exploited with such a mentality?
One of my professors with a Jewish background pointed out to us in class about how language and words can influence a culture. He cited the Yiddish term, "chutzpah" as an example. He said without that term, the Jewish community coping mechanism to institutional discrimination would've been compromised. Conversely he pointed out that especially in the Chinese culture, no such word or term exist in the Chinese language (both Mandarin and Cantonese) and the closest term is presented as a negative trait.
So I'll be the first to admit that my ethnic background lacks "chutzpah."
So when missionaries or church leaders approach their Asian souls to "save," there's very little resistance or questioning about whether their theology is correct or not. "Heathen culture?" Guilty. "Idolatry?" Guilty. One former Sunday school teacher told me how he broke ties from his family because they still practiced the gravesite visitation as observed on the Chinese calendar. Buddhism, folk religion, Shintoism, Taoism, and Confucianism are all considered "satanic."
And the Typical Asian House Negro Christian replies, "Forgive me Father, for I have sinned."
Before I go any further, there needs to be come clarifications:
1) Not all Christians are abusing the Name of God to elevate their social positions.
2) Not all Asian Christians are Asian House Negros.
3) Conversely, not all Asian House Negros are Christians.
4) Lastly, "House Negro(s)" aren't necessarily black.
I grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area, specifically in the Oakland/East Bay. Not only was there a significant Asian population, but there were a lot of different churches serving the Asian communities in various capacity. What I've witness and experienced this past 20 years in a church setting had factored in my decision to radically change my theological paradigm during the past 3 years.
Some highlights (or low) regarding race-relations within the Church:
While training in the L.A. area during the summer of 1999, I attended a singles event sponsored by a prominent Asian American church in Rosemead. The keynote speaker was a doctor in psychology whose topic was "Christian Mental Health Professional Take on Inter-Racial Dating and Relationships." The newlywed PsyD speaker raged on how it was "God's will" and "God's gift" that she married a caucasian and how disastrous the attempted courtship by a person of her shared ethnic background was prior to her marriage. Upon further discussion in the group, the dialogue evolved into why the majority of the women present were not interested in dating Asian men.
I chimed in. (whoops)
I shared with the group my dismay that the discussion is about inter-racial dating, yet only two specific ethnic groups were singled out in the discussion. When asked (prodded actually) if I had dated other races, I replied "yes." When prodded even further of whether or not "the other races" weren't caucasian, I again answered, "yes." Finally, one of the women asked me, "don't tell me you actually went out with someone black???" Again, I answered "yes." The three women who were sharing the same table as me moved to different tables. As they moved, overheard was "wow, THAT desperate."
Mind you, this was a church sponsored event.
In 2001, I attended a mixer for "Christian artists." The host was a member of one of the largest churches in San Francisco. In fact, any young adult who attended church in San Francisco would've at some point attended this popular church in The Mission. As we were getting acquainted, we learned that we knew a mutual person and confirmed his whereabouts. "Yeah, he went to Vietnam," he told me. "Oh, for some reason, my other friend said he was traveling to the Philippines," I replied. "Ahh, Vietnam, Philippines, all those people are the same," he snapped. I told him that comment was offensive and demanded an apology. He pointed out to me that he was the host and I was at his house. Later on, the young lady he was apparently dating whom he met at his church asked me to leave. Yep, she was Asian.
Needless to say, I wasn't part of that art group.
One of the first churches I attended was in Oakland prior to their move to San Leandro. I was in the 3rd and 4th grade while attending there. (Late 1970s) Eventually, they felt that the children needed a better education so they started their own church-sponsored private school.
It was during one of their event that I "accepted Christ," so it was expected that I would be a prime candidate to be one of their first batch of students. My mother was adamant that I continue to attend my regular school and not theirs. It would be years later before I learned of the reason why. Actually I would learn of her distaste for that specific church after her death in 2005. (more later)
What made this church stand out amongst all the churches serving the Chinese community was the fact that 1) they ran their own private school, 2) their pastor was NOT Chinese, and 3) their size and the fact they were not located in the immediate Oakland Chinatown area. Once they grew out of their Oakland location, they expanded at their new location.
In the mid-1990s it came to light that the pastor of the church profiled specific female students at their private school and arranged for "special pastoral counseling" with them. He made sure that the students' parents' first language wasn't English. He made sure there was turmoil in the home. He targeted female students with "disciplinary issues" at the school.
In spite of the fact that some of the students came forward, no a single peep from the press and/or local media, and worse, no charges were filed against the pastor.
Remember what I said about culture of adapting to challenging situation without resistance? That's basically what happened. The church was too big and too central to the community, so things were kept hushed hush.
As bad as it was, the aftermath was just as bad.
The replacement pastor was Chinese. A group who felt that they would be "better shepherded" by someone "more Godly," (ie, caucasian) eventually split from the church to form their own church, and found their "more appropriate pastor."
You think this was some sort of a church soap opera. But it's apparently just a typical day in da 510.
Oh so let's go back to "Mom..."
After my mother passed away in the Summer of 2005, my sister and I cleared out her personal belongings. She kept intricate records of every family activities. My sister was part of a drum corps in Oakland while I was growing up, and my mother was one of the parent directors of the group. Part of her responsibilities was to contact all community groups in the immediate Oakland area. That included the aforementioned church. For some reason, she kept a reply from THAT PASTOR addressed to her. In it, he scolded my mother for "being inconsiderate" to invite them to an event held on Sunday, and he "respectfully requested," that my mother should "cease leading his followers astray," and finally to "show more respect to God and Sundays."
So Pastor, I formally apologize that my mother's action of inviting your members to a drum corps sponsored event held on a Sunday had led you astray to the point that you lost self control and took advantage of several underage female students who were placed under your watch. Be thankful that you created enough Asian House Negros to cover for your transgressions, and especially that committed group of AHN who was dedicated to continue the insanity by splitting from your so-called legacy. I know you've transitioned and be thankful that I'm currently slowly but surely unlearning the concepts of Hell and Damnation because if there was anyone I felt should go there, it'd be you.
Along with the House Negroes of the World who sold the souls of their respected communities out.
So what does this speech have to do with spirituality? Lots. This is not a pragmatic compare and contrast between conventional Christian versus Islam ideology in the Black Community. This speech was made some 50 years ago, and the majority would argue that this speech is irrelevant now that we have a Black President in office. Not only do I beg to differ, but I want to venture out and say that this isn't only applicable to the African American community, but all ethnic communities of color still being marginalized by White AmeriKKKa.
As a person of Asian descent, I know squarely and clearly that Asians are too divided along the "House" and the "Fields." It's just that the House Asians, (mostly females) didn't just make it into "Master's House" but also into "Master's Bedroom." (Both figuratively and literally)
Wait, so what does this have to do with spirituality?
First off, after the incident involving Pastor Rick Warren, there was a constituent of Asian Christians who protested against the coalition of Asian pastors who demanded/requested a formal apology from Warren. Their response was basically that because Warren has done so much for the Kingdom of God, he has no need to apologize and on top of that, as Christians, the Asian pastors failed in the example by "not forgiving" Warren.
Sickening
Truth be told, not only do Asian House Negros exist in the Christian Church, the Christian Church basically serves as an incubator for the development of AHN. Utilizing the urgency to "save souls" of the "heathen Asian culture," the Church has placed themselves into the position of power by placing an entire community based on their ethnicity and culture to "be saved." Consequently they leave the community of believers with an excessive amount of guilt because of their ethnic and cultural background.
The good news about the Pastor Rick Warren incident is that it sheds light to a problem that no one is willing to talk about.
Actually doesn't have the Cojones to bring up.
One of the strength of Asian ideology (call is Confucianism or Zen, or Tao, whatever) is the fact of the capability to make the best of a situation, flow with it, and be able to adapt with little to no resistance to the situation, regardless of challenges or difficulties that situation presents.
It can be a strength as well as weakness.
Can you see how a community can be exploited with such a mentality?
One of my professors with a Jewish background pointed out to us in class about how language and words can influence a culture. He cited the Yiddish term, "chutzpah" as an example. He said without that term, the Jewish community coping mechanism to institutional discrimination would've been compromised. Conversely he pointed out that especially in the Chinese culture, no such word or term exist in the Chinese language (both Mandarin and Cantonese) and the closest term is presented as a negative trait.
So I'll be the first to admit that my ethnic background lacks "chutzpah."
So when missionaries or church leaders approach their Asian souls to "save," there's very little resistance or questioning about whether their theology is correct or not. "Heathen culture?" Guilty. "Idolatry?" Guilty. One former Sunday school teacher told me how he broke ties from his family because they still practiced the gravesite visitation as observed on the Chinese calendar. Buddhism, folk religion, Shintoism, Taoism, and Confucianism are all considered "satanic."
And the Typical Asian House Negro Christian replies, "Forgive me Father, for I have sinned."
Before I go any further, there needs to be come clarifications:
1) Not all Christians are abusing the Name of God to elevate their social positions.
2) Not all Asian Christians are Asian House Negros.
3) Conversely, not all Asian House Negros are Christians.
4) Lastly, "House Negro(s)" aren't necessarily black.
I grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area, specifically in the Oakland/East Bay. Not only was there a significant Asian population, but there were a lot of different churches serving the Asian communities in various capacity. What I've witness and experienced this past 20 years in a church setting had factored in my decision to radically change my theological paradigm during the past 3 years.
Some highlights (or low) regarding race-relations within the Church:
While training in the L.A. area during the summer of 1999, I attended a singles event sponsored by a prominent Asian American church in Rosemead. The keynote speaker was a doctor in psychology whose topic was "Christian Mental Health Professional Take on Inter-Racial Dating and Relationships." The newlywed PsyD speaker raged on how it was "God's will" and "God's gift" that she married a caucasian and how disastrous the attempted courtship by a person of her shared ethnic background was prior to her marriage. Upon further discussion in the group, the dialogue evolved into why the majority of the women present were not interested in dating Asian men.
I chimed in. (whoops)
I shared with the group my dismay that the discussion is about inter-racial dating, yet only two specific ethnic groups were singled out in the discussion. When asked (prodded actually) if I had dated other races, I replied "yes." When prodded even further of whether or not "the other races" weren't caucasian, I again answered, "yes." Finally, one of the women asked me, "don't tell me you actually went out with someone black???" Again, I answered "yes." The three women who were sharing the same table as me moved to different tables. As they moved, overheard was "wow, THAT desperate."
Mind you, this was a church sponsored event.
In 2001, I attended a mixer for "Christian artists." The host was a member of one of the largest churches in San Francisco. In fact, any young adult who attended church in San Francisco would've at some point attended this popular church in The Mission. As we were getting acquainted, we learned that we knew a mutual person and confirmed his whereabouts. "Yeah, he went to Vietnam," he told me. "Oh, for some reason, my other friend said he was traveling to the Philippines," I replied. "Ahh, Vietnam, Philippines, all those people are the same," he snapped. I told him that comment was offensive and demanded an apology. He pointed out to me that he was the host and I was at his house. Later on, the young lady he was apparently dating whom he met at his church asked me to leave. Yep, she was Asian.
Needless to say, I wasn't part of that art group.
One of the first churches I attended was in Oakland prior to their move to San Leandro. I was in the 3rd and 4th grade while attending there. (Late 1970s) Eventually, they felt that the children needed a better education so they started their own church-sponsored private school.
It was during one of their event that I "accepted Christ," so it was expected that I would be a prime candidate to be one of their first batch of students. My mother was adamant that I continue to attend my regular school and not theirs. It would be years later before I learned of the reason why. Actually I would learn of her distaste for that specific church after her death in 2005. (more later)
What made this church stand out amongst all the churches serving the Chinese community was the fact that 1) they ran their own private school, 2) their pastor was NOT Chinese, and 3) their size and the fact they were not located in the immediate Oakland Chinatown area. Once they grew out of their Oakland location, they expanded at their new location.
In the mid-1990s it came to light that the pastor of the church profiled specific female students at their private school and arranged for "special pastoral counseling" with them. He made sure that the students' parents' first language wasn't English. He made sure there was turmoil in the home. He targeted female students with "disciplinary issues" at the school.
In spite of the fact that some of the students came forward, no a single peep from the press and/or local media, and worse, no charges were filed against the pastor.
Remember what I said about culture of adapting to challenging situation without resistance? That's basically what happened. The church was too big and too central to the community, so things were kept hushed hush.
As bad as it was, the aftermath was just as bad.
The replacement pastor was Chinese. A group who felt that they would be "better shepherded" by someone "more Godly," (ie, caucasian) eventually split from the church to form their own church, and found their "more appropriate pastor."
You think this was some sort of a church soap opera. But it's apparently just a typical day in da 510.
Oh so let's go back to "Mom..."
After my mother passed away in the Summer of 2005, my sister and I cleared out her personal belongings. She kept intricate records of every family activities. My sister was part of a drum corps in Oakland while I was growing up, and my mother was one of the parent directors of the group. Part of her responsibilities was to contact all community groups in the immediate Oakland area. That included the aforementioned church. For some reason, she kept a reply from THAT PASTOR addressed to her. In it, he scolded my mother for "being inconsiderate" to invite them to an event held on Sunday, and he "respectfully requested," that my mother should "cease leading his followers astray," and finally to "show more respect to God and Sundays."
So Pastor, I formally apologize that my mother's action of inviting your members to a drum corps sponsored event held on a Sunday had led you astray to the point that you lost self control and took advantage of several underage female students who were placed under your watch. Be thankful that you created enough Asian House Negros to cover for your transgressions, and especially that committed group of AHN who was dedicated to continue the insanity by splitting from your so-called legacy. I know you've transitioned and be thankful that I'm currently slowly but surely unlearning the concepts of Hell and Damnation because if there was anyone I felt should go there, it'd be you.
Along with the House Negroes of the World who sold the souls of their respected communities out.
17 October, 2013
Is There Such Thing as "Justified Mass Church Shootings?"
When I was completing my undergrad at CSU Hayward some years back, I was still very active in the church. (Mainstream Christian Church) In fact the only extra-curricular activity I participated in at Hayward was their local chapter of Campus Crusade for Christ. In fact there was a quarter where I took on 23 units so my Sunday visits to church was often compromised and my participation at the Campus Crusade meetings became more important as it became a substitute for Sundays.
During one of our meetings, our facilitator read aloud a printed prayer request sent to us from a member of Wedgwood Baptist Church. At times our facilitator broke down while reading the list. It was Fall quarter of 1999, and we received the emailed prayer request in the aftermath of the church massacre committed by Larry Gene Ashbrook. The entire discussion time which normally takes about 40 minutes was taken as the prayer request(s) were tearfully read aloud to our group. At the end, I shared with the group that what I found disturbing in all this was throughout the list, not once was the name of the gunman (Ashbrook) mentioned, and I attempted to quote Matthew 5:44 as a basis that at some point, his name or at least his remaining family members should've been on that list.
That created a stir at the meeting.
One person came to my defense. The rest of the group including the facilitator began to engage in a Bible memory contest with me to rebuke my assessment. Thankfully that lone person who came to my defense is still someone I remain in contact with. Now granted, my prayers for my so-called "enemies" may be along the line of "muther-f*r," true. But throughout the years from 1995 to even now, I'm bombarded with the "forgive them, pray for them" in response to a violation done by others towards me to the point that I got sick and tired of that, especially when the violation was committed by a fellow brother or sister of the church.
Hence...
I left the mainline Christian church back in 2011. I began to embrace the New Thought Practical Christian movement who embraced more of a Christian Metaphysics approach and I thought I was in a better spot.
I THOUGHT...
Unity and any church with the moniker "Practical Christianity, Christian Metaphysic, New Thought Christianity," has been undergoing an identity process that began to take place around 2009-12 and a lot of their material and literature as well as their basic teaching was undergoing a decision making process to determine the direction and the overall message of the Unity Movement. In other words, Unity not was, but is undergoing a process which is on the verge of creating an organizational split between those embracing the new changes versus those who wish to hold onto the original teachings. Along with those teachings, they also want to hold onto their older ways. In other words, if the Unity Church or Center declares themselves "Culturally Christian," they really embrace the culture of other Christians, and that includes the conservative thinking that comes along with it.
Rev Guy Lynch runs a website, a non profit, and a call-in podcast called "The Practical Christian." He was one of the first Unity minister I contacted while Unity was going through their rebranding process and I was looking for a Unity who was teaching what Eric Butterworth and Catherine Ponder were teaching. He's an advocate for gun control, he's against the Christian right on numerous issues, he's for embracing the LGBT movement as well as marriage equality. He goes out of his way as a Christian minister to take a stand against conservative Christian clergy members.
Recently, Pastor Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church had participated in an event where he mocked and imitated Asians in a caricature way. What's disturbing about the whole thing was that not only has he not apologized even after a group of Asian clergy had requested a formal apology, but numerous supporters lined up defending his actions. So I posted that article on Rev Lynch's Practical Christian Facebook page to bring it to their attention.
It was deleted and ignored.
I commented two or three times how disappointed I was about Rev Lynch decision to look the other way and pointed out the hypocrisy in the entire situation. Had Warren mocked gays in a similar fashion, Rev Lynch would rally his supporters immediately. Earlier today I found myself banned from the Practical Christian Facebook page where I was further humiliated.
So what does this journey to New Thought have to do with incidents involving church shootings?
At that Campus Crusade meeting, I was flabbergasted at the possibility that someone would enter a church and just begin shooting. After all, it was less than two years after I visited China and even a government sanctioned church there. Christianity was still outlawed in China and even at the church we were allowed to attend, someone entering in and shooting up the place was unfathomable. So when this incident occurred during a young adult Christian rock concert rally in Texas, we were all shocked. Then I read about Jeremiah Neitz's account about his interaction with Ashbrook moments before his suicide. The more Neitz told Ashbrook about his faith in Christ, the more defensive Ashbrook became until Ashbrook shot himself. Until that point I often wondered how angry can you get at God, at life in general, at people in order to shoot up a church. I mean people have then and now been blatantly violated by the institution called the Church (all denominations) and they don't react the same way.
Then again, the law of karma is enforced even against an institution called the Church.
The institution called the Church has done so much cover-ups and blatant violation of people who looked to them for help, inspiration and hope that sooner or later, that karmic debt needs to be paid. What's sad about an institution, the actual individual who committed the violation may not even feel any of the impact of repercussion in the event of the institution repaying it's karmic debt. From what I've seen past and even now I don't think that debt's been fully paid yet. In some ways, I can't blame those clergy who keep preaching "forgiveness," because who knows what could happen if it wasn't constantly reminded.
For all we know, the Larry Gene Ashbrook incident may actually be part of a karmic debt resulting from clergy who sexually violated their parishioners. Now the pastoral staff of Wedgwood had nothing to do with those clergy who's guilty of sexual violations. But as I said, the overall institution of the Church may be paying for that violation through that incident.
So when the institution of the church justifies, defends, or looks the other way whenever clergy offends other people because of their ethnicity, karma is around the corner.
No, there may be no such thing as "justifiable mass church shootings," but I look forward to whenever the next bunch of dead bodies are strolled out of a church sanctuary, I can send the pastor a message of "get over it" just like those Warren supporters who made those same comments against the Asians who filed that grievance. Actually, in all honesty, even though I've been searching for a ministerial training program, if I were to learn that a shooting and/or tragic incident occurred with certain specific churches, I'll admit I may find myself in a celebratory mode. Like if another child of Warren were to take their own life, or if Saddleback experienced some other sort of tragedy, it'll be like a Raider's victory, and you know how much of a Raiders fan I am.
The Journey SF, Cornerstone Church, actually BOTH Cornerstone Churches in SF, don't ever think that I'll pray with you or for you if some crazy were to enter your place and tear sh*t up. Same for Rev Lynch and Practical Christian, whether it's an actual church or not. Either case, karma's a bitch. Pastor Lightfoot may be dead, but karma will accept payments from his so-called legacy.
Time to shop for "Get Over It" cards...can't wait to mail them!
During one of our meetings, our facilitator read aloud a printed prayer request sent to us from a member of Wedgwood Baptist Church. At times our facilitator broke down while reading the list. It was Fall quarter of 1999, and we received the emailed prayer request in the aftermath of the church massacre committed by Larry Gene Ashbrook. The entire discussion time which normally takes about 40 minutes was taken as the prayer request(s) were tearfully read aloud to our group. At the end, I shared with the group that what I found disturbing in all this was throughout the list, not once was the name of the gunman (Ashbrook) mentioned, and I attempted to quote Matthew 5:44 as a basis that at some point, his name or at least his remaining family members should've been on that list.
That created a stir at the meeting.
One person came to my defense. The rest of the group including the facilitator began to engage in a Bible memory contest with me to rebuke my assessment. Thankfully that lone person who came to my defense is still someone I remain in contact with. Now granted, my prayers for my so-called "enemies" may be along the line of "muther-f*r," true. But throughout the years from 1995 to even now, I'm bombarded with the "forgive them, pray for them" in response to a violation done by others towards me to the point that I got sick and tired of that, especially when the violation was committed by a fellow brother or sister of the church.
Hence...
I left the mainline Christian church back in 2011. I began to embrace the New Thought Practical Christian movement who embraced more of a Christian Metaphysics approach and I thought I was in a better spot.
I THOUGHT...
Unity and any church with the moniker "Practical Christianity, Christian Metaphysic, New Thought Christianity," has been undergoing an identity process that began to take place around 2009-12 and a lot of their material and literature as well as their basic teaching was undergoing a decision making process to determine the direction and the overall message of the Unity Movement. In other words, Unity not was, but is undergoing a process which is on the verge of creating an organizational split between those embracing the new changes versus those who wish to hold onto the original teachings. Along with those teachings, they also want to hold onto their older ways. In other words, if the Unity Church or Center declares themselves "Culturally Christian," they really embrace the culture of other Christians, and that includes the conservative thinking that comes along with it.
Rev Guy Lynch runs a website, a non profit, and a call-in podcast called "The Practical Christian." He was one of the first Unity minister I contacted while Unity was going through their rebranding process and I was looking for a Unity who was teaching what Eric Butterworth and Catherine Ponder were teaching. He's an advocate for gun control, he's against the Christian right on numerous issues, he's for embracing the LGBT movement as well as marriage equality. He goes out of his way as a Christian minister to take a stand against conservative Christian clergy members.
Recently, Pastor Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church had participated in an event where he mocked and imitated Asians in a caricature way. What's disturbing about the whole thing was that not only has he not apologized even after a group of Asian clergy had requested a formal apology, but numerous supporters lined up defending his actions. So I posted that article on Rev Lynch's Practical Christian Facebook page to bring it to their attention.
It was deleted and ignored.
I commented two or three times how disappointed I was about Rev Lynch decision to look the other way and pointed out the hypocrisy in the entire situation. Had Warren mocked gays in a similar fashion, Rev Lynch would rally his supporters immediately. Earlier today I found myself banned from the Practical Christian Facebook page where I was further humiliated.
So what does this journey to New Thought have to do with incidents involving church shootings?
At that Campus Crusade meeting, I was flabbergasted at the possibility that someone would enter a church and just begin shooting. After all, it was less than two years after I visited China and even a government sanctioned church there. Christianity was still outlawed in China and even at the church we were allowed to attend, someone entering in and shooting up the place was unfathomable. So when this incident occurred during a young adult Christian rock concert rally in Texas, we were all shocked. Then I read about Jeremiah Neitz's account about his interaction with Ashbrook moments before his suicide. The more Neitz told Ashbrook about his faith in Christ, the more defensive Ashbrook became until Ashbrook shot himself. Until that point I often wondered how angry can you get at God, at life in general, at people in order to shoot up a church. I mean people have then and now been blatantly violated by the institution called the Church (all denominations) and they don't react the same way.
Then again, the law of karma is enforced even against an institution called the Church.
The institution called the Church has done so much cover-ups and blatant violation of people who looked to them for help, inspiration and hope that sooner or later, that karmic debt needs to be paid. What's sad about an institution, the actual individual who committed the violation may not even feel any of the impact of repercussion in the event of the institution repaying it's karmic debt. From what I've seen past and even now I don't think that debt's been fully paid yet. In some ways, I can't blame those clergy who keep preaching "forgiveness," because who knows what could happen if it wasn't constantly reminded.
For all we know, the Larry Gene Ashbrook incident may actually be part of a karmic debt resulting from clergy who sexually violated their parishioners. Now the pastoral staff of Wedgwood had nothing to do with those clergy who's guilty of sexual violations. But as I said, the overall institution of the Church may be paying for that violation through that incident.
So when the institution of the church justifies, defends, or looks the other way whenever clergy offends other people because of their ethnicity, karma is around the corner.
No, there may be no such thing as "justifiable mass church shootings," but I look forward to whenever the next bunch of dead bodies are strolled out of a church sanctuary, I can send the pastor a message of "get over it" just like those Warren supporters who made those same comments against the Asians who filed that grievance. Actually, in all honesty, even though I've been searching for a ministerial training program, if I were to learn that a shooting and/or tragic incident occurred with certain specific churches, I'll admit I may find myself in a celebratory mode. Like if another child of Warren were to take their own life, or if Saddleback experienced some other sort of tragedy, it'll be like a Raider's victory, and you know how much of a Raiders fan I am.
The Journey SF, Cornerstone Church, actually BOTH Cornerstone Churches in SF, don't ever think that I'll pray with you or for you if some crazy were to enter your place and tear sh*t up. Same for Rev Lynch and Practical Christian, whether it's an actual church or not. Either case, karma's a bitch. Pastor Lightfoot may be dead, but karma will accept payments from his so-called legacy.
Time to shop for "Get Over It" cards...can't wait to mail them!
14 August, 2013
Fox News vs. Reza Aslan
By now I'm sure the infamous debate that the inept Fox News reporter Loren Green created against Reza Aslan has been forwarded and viewed numerous times. The more I view the so called interview, the more I question the qualifications on what it takes to be hired as a "journalist" for FOX News. Based on my observations of the footage, the lone requirement to work for FOX in the capacity of a host is:
1) Modest and professional appearance with a hint of attractiveness.
2) 8th grade reading level for teleprompter abilities.
3) Voice/speech coaching to articulate words.
4) Transparency to show emotions.
I also suppose that logic and common sense was NOT a requirement.
If you haven't seen the footage or know what I'm referring to now, simply goto YouTube and type keywords: "Resa Aslan, FOX, Loren Green" and the footage should pop up. I only heard heresay about biased from FOX News over the last few years in the aftermath of the Obama election back in 2008, although I heard they were pretty biased on behalf of Former President Bush and The Iraq War 2.0. What I saw was not even journalism. I have never seen a reporter or interviewer look so ill-prepared for an assignment. I mean it had all the appearance of a real-life Kelly Bundy auditioning for a newscaster position type of situation.
Reza Aslan was on FOX News to discuss the contents of his recently released Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth Unfortunately, he ended up not discussing his book because Loren Green kept placing him in a position to defend his right to even write the book in the first place.
Based on Ms. Green's logic, as a person of Chinese descent, I will utilize her logic and declare from this day forward that all Sinologists who have no trace of Chinese ancestry whatsoever are not qualified to write any literature on China, Chinese, or Asia-related material.
Sounds ridiculous? Ludicrous? I later learned that this was actually not an anomaly on FOX; this was actually a common practice amongst other hosts and journalist on that network. I don't know what's scarier: that such programming is the norm on national television or that a significant segment of the population would actually accept it at face value without any question and/or research.
And I haven't even discussed what the topic is in relation to this blog which is my discourse and reflection on spirituality and religion. That's because the point of all this was to show and illustrate how a news interview can distract one from the core issue topic.
If you really want to know more about the content of the book, click on the above title link and order the book. Heck as much reading as I do, I wouldn't mind reading it myself. I just had a surge of energy after reading The Shack. I highly recommend that book for those who were or still are angry at God, and/or those who question whether or not there is a God period.
What's more disturbing about the situation is the fact that Loren Green is supposedly the "Religious Correspondent" of FOX News. It's disturbing in the sense that after Dr Aslan listed his credential as a religious scholar, it went totally over her head and she promptly returned to her argument in questioning his qualifications for writing the book due to his personal faith. I don't know what their qualifications are for a "Religious Correspondent," but I expect more than someone to simply regurgitate other peoples religious opinions.
Otherwise Dr. Aslan has FOX and Ms. Green to thank because he ended up #1 in book sales after the interview. Great job FOX.
1) Modest and professional appearance with a hint of attractiveness.
2) 8th grade reading level for teleprompter abilities.
3) Voice/speech coaching to articulate words.
4) Transparency to show emotions.
I also suppose that logic and common sense was NOT a requirement.
If you haven't seen the footage or know what I'm referring to now, simply goto YouTube and type keywords: "Resa Aslan, FOX, Loren Green" and the footage should pop up. I only heard heresay about biased from FOX News over the last few years in the aftermath of the Obama election back in 2008, although I heard they were pretty biased on behalf of Former President Bush and The Iraq War 2.0. What I saw was not even journalism. I have never seen a reporter or interviewer look so ill-prepared for an assignment. I mean it had all the appearance of a real-life Kelly Bundy auditioning for a newscaster position type of situation.
Reza Aslan was on FOX News to discuss the contents of his recently released Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth Unfortunately, he ended up not discussing his book because Loren Green kept placing him in a position to defend his right to even write the book in the first place.
Based on Ms. Green's logic, as a person of Chinese descent, I will utilize her logic and declare from this day forward that all Sinologists who have no trace of Chinese ancestry whatsoever are not qualified to write any literature on China, Chinese, or Asia-related material.
Sounds ridiculous? Ludicrous? I later learned that this was actually not an anomaly on FOX; this was actually a common practice amongst other hosts and journalist on that network. I don't know what's scarier: that such programming is the norm on national television or that a significant segment of the population would actually accept it at face value without any question and/or research.
And I haven't even discussed what the topic is in relation to this blog which is my discourse and reflection on spirituality and religion. That's because the point of all this was to show and illustrate how a news interview can distract one from the core issue topic.
If you really want to know more about the content of the book, click on the above title link and order the book. Heck as much reading as I do, I wouldn't mind reading it myself. I just had a surge of energy after reading The Shack. I highly recommend that book for those who were or still are angry at God, and/or those who question whether or not there is a God period.
What's more disturbing about the situation is the fact that Loren Green is supposedly the "Religious Correspondent" of FOX News. It's disturbing in the sense that after Dr Aslan listed his credential as a religious scholar, it went totally over her head and she promptly returned to her argument in questioning his qualifications for writing the book due to his personal faith. I don't know what their qualifications are for a "Religious Correspondent," but I expect more than someone to simply regurgitate other peoples religious opinions.
Otherwise Dr. Aslan has FOX and Ms. Green to thank because he ended up #1 in book sales after the interview. Great job FOX.
11 April, 2013
To Unlearn...
For the past three years, I've been cramming every New Thought pioneer author from Cady to Butterworth to E. Fox to Fillmore, all the way to Ponder and other authors. Certain books I carry with me to read over and read over again. For the last year and 3/4 I've been attending different New Thought based worship centers, primarily Unity, and most recently I finally pledged membership at the Castro Valley Unity Church.
It's not such much that I need to learn something new, it's more of a need to emotionally let go and unlearn what's been imbedded in me from a spiritual perspective. If you never had a church background and you decide to embrace the core belief/premise of The New Thought Movement, I border on "envy." The reason is because you're learning from a much clearer slate than I am.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the terms, "New Thought," "mainstream/evangelical" or any other terms common with non-Catholic Christianity, there are many resources out there on the internet, and you can simply look at my older entries on this blog. Let me clarify what I mean when I used the term "Mainstream/Evangelical Christianity:" This normally refers to Christian churches not affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, and their basic beliefs/agreements include:
1) Old and New Testament of the Holy Bible to be the highest authority/Word of God
2) Humanity had fallen as a result of Eve's "disobedience in the Garden of Eden" which caused "sin" to enter the world.
Corollary to 2 is We as in humanity are "sinners."
3) Jesus is both simultaneously God and Man
Corollary to 3 is Jesus was borned by Mary, who was impregnated not physically, but spiritually
Jesus performed numerous miracles
Jesus is "God's begotten Son." (yes, in capital letters)
4) Jesus was crucified on the Cross during the Jewish Passover festival.
5) Three days after his death, Jesus was resurrected.
6) God exist in the form of the Trinity: Father, Son, Holy Spirit
7) Humanity is condemned for their "sin" to eternity in Hell.
Corollary to 7: believing, confessing, and accepting Jesus death and resurrection of the Cross saves them from eternal Hell. Grace as a result from Christ covers all sins committed by those believers and are pardoned and forgiven.
Corollary to the corollary: those who don't believe in Jesus will go to Hell.
That's pretty much it in a nutshell. In a lot of ways, those core beliefs doesn't deviate much from Roman Catholicism, but it gets more complicated to the point I'm not knowledgeable enough to provide a nutshell of their basic beliefs. I can tell you that after being in a relationship in the last three years with a very devout Catholic young lady, what I do learn I tend to disagree or put up an initial resistance.
The premise for New Thought:
1) We (humanity) are created in the Image and Likeness of God.
Corollary to 1 is we're divine beings with God present in us. ie, we're spiritual beings having a human experince
2) The Universe is expanding and growing because God is expanding and growing
3) Only one power exist Universally: God. No other power exist.
4) As an additional Corollary to 1, we(humanity) as Divine beings, are given dominion, therefore what we think, we create. (ie, thoughts become things)
5) For New Thought Christians: Jesus manifested the Beingness of Christ, however he isn't the only one who can; we all can.
So for so many years, as a member of The Salvation Army, I learned and it was reinforced to me over and over how my best effort to connect with God was just "a filthy rag" as compared to "His Holiness." Without Jesus, or without Christ, I was doomed. When I church hopped from Crosswinds to Cornerstone to Journey, the message was the same, with perhaps a "more graceful" message that "they love the Sinner, but HATE their Sin."
Here's the irony in all this. The first description of Man (Humanity) in Genesis (1st book of the Old Testament of the Bible) is that Man was "created in the image and likeness of God." (Gen 1:26-28) So this whole concept that man is "sinner saved by Grace" is false. Yet from an emotional and core standpoint, this is one thing that's challenging to let go of. As a matter of fact, I'm looking over my shoulders out for lightning to strike me as I type this.
So much need to unlearn and to let go.
It's not such much that I need to learn something new, it's more of a need to emotionally let go and unlearn what's been imbedded in me from a spiritual perspective. If you never had a church background and you decide to embrace the core belief/premise of The New Thought Movement, I border on "envy." The reason is because you're learning from a much clearer slate than I am.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the terms, "New Thought," "mainstream/evangelical" or any other terms common with non-Catholic Christianity, there are many resources out there on the internet, and you can simply look at my older entries on this blog. Let me clarify what I mean when I used the term "Mainstream/Evangelical Christianity:" This normally refers to Christian churches not affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, and their basic beliefs/agreements include:
1) Old and New Testament of the Holy Bible to be the highest authority/Word of God
2) Humanity had fallen as a result of Eve's "disobedience in the Garden of Eden" which caused "sin" to enter the world.
Corollary to 2 is We as in humanity are "sinners."
3) Jesus is both simultaneously God and Man
Corollary to 3 is Jesus was borned by Mary, who was impregnated not physically, but spiritually
Jesus performed numerous miracles
Jesus is "God's begotten Son." (yes, in capital letters)
4) Jesus was crucified on the Cross during the Jewish Passover festival.
5) Three days after his death, Jesus was resurrected.
6) God exist in the form of the Trinity: Father, Son, Holy Spirit
7) Humanity is condemned for their "sin" to eternity in Hell.
Corollary to 7: believing, confessing, and accepting Jesus death and resurrection of the Cross saves them from eternal Hell. Grace as a result from Christ covers all sins committed by those believers and are pardoned and forgiven.
Corollary to the corollary: those who don't believe in Jesus will go to Hell.
That's pretty much it in a nutshell. In a lot of ways, those core beliefs doesn't deviate much from Roman Catholicism, but it gets more complicated to the point I'm not knowledgeable enough to provide a nutshell of their basic beliefs. I can tell you that after being in a relationship in the last three years with a very devout Catholic young lady, what I do learn I tend to disagree or put up an initial resistance.
The premise for New Thought:
1) We (humanity) are created in the Image and Likeness of God.
Corollary to 1 is we're divine beings with God present in us. ie, we're spiritual beings having a human experince
2) The Universe is expanding and growing because God is expanding and growing
3) Only one power exist Universally: God. No other power exist.
4) As an additional Corollary to 1, we(humanity) as Divine beings, are given dominion, therefore what we think, we create. (ie, thoughts become things)
5) For New Thought Christians: Jesus manifested the Beingness of Christ, however he isn't the only one who can; we all can.
So for so many years, as a member of The Salvation Army, I learned and it was reinforced to me over and over how my best effort to connect with God was just "a filthy rag" as compared to "His Holiness." Without Jesus, or without Christ, I was doomed. When I church hopped from Crosswinds to Cornerstone to Journey, the message was the same, with perhaps a "more graceful" message that "they love the Sinner, but HATE their Sin."
Here's the irony in all this. The first description of Man (Humanity) in Genesis (1st book of the Old Testament of the Bible) is that Man was "created in the image and likeness of God." (Gen 1:26-28) So this whole concept that man is "sinner saved by Grace" is false. Yet from an emotional and core standpoint, this is one thing that's challenging to let go of. As a matter of fact, I'm looking over my shoulders out for lightning to strike me as I type this.
So much need to unlearn and to let go.
01 September, 2012
The Secrets of The Salvation Army
For a good 7 years of my life, I was a part of The Salvation Army Asian American Corps in San Francisco, California. Church, God, and Christ became a center or SUPPOSEDLY became a center of my life during that time. I've blogged in the past about my time with them on my original Faith Entry.
Let's face it, for the most part all families are dysfunctional. (Best case scenario: quirky; worse case: criminally dysfunctional) This church family is no different. It's just that there's no "father/mother" dynamic, but more of a "pastor/pastor" one in place. (One of the requirements of The Salvation Army pastors aka "Corps Officers" is that both parties to the marriage must enter the ministry. In other words, if a husband felt a "calling," the wife must enter ministry training too along with him. It's somewhat progressive in a sense cause the wife does have equal title and position, but not progressive because what if the wife felt another occupation was her calling? Refer to this cause I'm going to go back to this.)
I've already shared a lot of the criticism I received from various key members of this organization on the aforementioned blog entry, and some of their "quirks," but it seems like the quirks are ever expanding.
When I "officially" left at the end of 2001, there were a lot of whispers and speculation of where I was going to end up. I left a message on the end of my letter acknowledging them as my "1st church family," and that I leave "with no ill-will towards anyone." When I received a message from the Territorial Director of Program that I "fell short of the higher standard of Christ," I suspected that though I share no ill-will, the opposite may not be true. That was confirmed when I learned that I was a center topic of discussion shortly after my departure amongst my previous study group. Now of course my study group was going to discuss my departure, it's just that the added twist was the attendance of the Corps Officers themselves. That's when I learned that the officer commented with a sarcastic tone that he "hopes I find what I'm looking for."
Now that I've been studying and learning about New Thought Practical Christianity, I feel a breath of fresh air and a sense of freedom, however I also am aware that there still lies an emotional bondage I developed as a result of my time with SA. Slowly and surely, those layers are thankfully coming off. Gone is the need to inquire about whether or not a business person is a Christian before conducting a transaction with them. In fact I recall that it was "a good idea" to use those who advertise on KFAX. (A Christian talk show station) So after following suit I learned the hard way that just because a business declares their Christian belief, that doesn't necessarily means their business practices are "Christ-like."
Now another aspect of The Salvation Army is their propensity to assign the corps officers to different assignments. They nickname this procedure as "the move." This is when around the month of May corps officers learn if they're going to be re-assigned to another location. Having visited a corps with several different officers in charge within a seven year period, one should not be surprised at the general surface small talk, lack of a connection mentality amongst the congregants. Having visited a "final service" of a corps officer who was being "moved," what I witness was not an encouraging sight.
When a corps officer couple went through a divorce, the husband adamantly wanted to remain as the corps officer. Because of the divorce, not only did he lose his position, he lost his other benefits as well. It was believed that they were not "truly called" as corps officer since they could not hold their marriage. Eventually the Army "rehired" the husband as an "Envoy" (not full benefits as an officer) since they were short-handed finding officers.
I also shared an experience where I was openly criticized about my "quiet time." That's a time which consist of anywhere between 10 minutes to up to 120 minutes of Bible reading/studying and personal prayer time. Upon my return and learning about "quiet time," I often closed my day before bedtime. After an incident involving myself, I was accused of not having a "quiet time" otherwise the incident wouldn't have occurred. I was then grilled on what I did and how I performed my "quiet time." When they learned that I did so at the end of the day, they concluded that the incident occurred because I did not conduct that time in the morning. Eventually my quiet times became less and less.
Our Sunday school instructor was the brother in law of the then corps officers. He often interject his opinion on how "sinful" it was to not honor the boycott of Disney. (This was during the Ellen De Generes controversy) Ironically enough, The Salvation Army was sponsoring a Salvation Army Day at Disneyland. He was also the same one who linked any struggle that the male congregants experienced to whether or not they attended an annual event called The Promise Keepers. The Promise Keepers was an all male Christian outdoor rally. If they struggled and did not attend, that's where the problem lies. If they struggled and did attend, they needed to make a commitment to register for the next one. It should not be surprising that one of the number one "struggle" within those who attended regularly were sexual and pornographic in nature. That aspect was so repressed so deep. Sadly, the single male members were singled out or "profiled" as being the highest "at risk" for such struggles.
When I was "baptized" into the Corps, it was really a "swearing-in" and a document signing ceremony. There was no water involved. The document itself included The Salvation Army's Articles of Faith. It also included a list of "I commit to..." One of them included an "I commit to abstaining from smoking, alcoholic beverage, and non-prescription drug consumption." So based on that declaration of commitment, drug-addiction within The Salvation Army is avoided right? Well, remember the key word(s) here are "NON-PRESCRIPTION" drug use. There's no problem as long as the doctor makes a prescription. So even though there were incidents of Corps officers who were abusing their prescription pain-killers, there was technically no problem since the doctor prescribed them.
Lastly, as a member of the Summer Service Corps program, I came and met a number of those who were openly recruited to become Corps officers in training. I'll admit even I once considered the possibility. Let me explain what Summer Service Corps is. During summer academic break, college age and young adults are recruited for a 6-8 week program to serve on behalf of The Salvation Army in a ministry, in most cases overseas. It's basically a summer mission. It's also a way to recruit for new corps officers. A territory would send 4-6 teams to different assignments. All teams report to the Territory center for orientation. (In my case, we were part of the Western Territory, located in Palos Verdes, California) I met quite a few people during that summer (1997) I even reconnected with some of them via Facebook in the past few years. Recently I learned that one of them whom I met through the orientation and the "debriefing session" (we served on different assigned teams) was suffering from substance abuse and suicidal tendency. Upon further inquiry, this person suffered from PTSS that was incurred during her assignment when we served in 97. The traumatic event she encountered was coming upon the levels of abuse the officer to whom she reported to during her assignment was committing. (Physical, sexual, and emotional) I don't know if she personally received that abuse or was a witness to it. If you think that the Catholic Church was guilty of scandals, then I'm sure The Salvation Army comes a very close second.
So why letting all of this come out now? Part of it is simply "housecleaning" for me. Tired of keeping all of this inside and not moving forward. Another reason is because of recent events coming to light. One of the former members whom I maintained contact with over the years was allegedly involved in a criminal investigation and mysteriously disappeared.
In dealing with the emotional abuse that I tolerated from this organization during my 7 years with them, I accept my responsibility of my part in it. As an institution who's public image is based on supposed "Christian qualities" and public perception, it's time to clean up and take a closer look in the mirror before condemning others. It's not so easy to practice what you preach after all. Stop sweeping the dirt under the rug and pretend that the dirt doesn't exist. When I spent time with the Territory Program Director back in '97, I was surprised and baffled when he mentioned to me of all the pending lawsuits against them.
Now I'm not as surprised.
Let's face it, for the most part all families are dysfunctional. (Best case scenario: quirky; worse case: criminally dysfunctional) This church family is no different. It's just that there's no "father/mother" dynamic, but more of a "pastor/pastor" one in place. (One of the requirements of The Salvation Army pastors aka "Corps Officers" is that both parties to the marriage must enter the ministry. In other words, if a husband felt a "calling," the wife must enter ministry training too along with him. It's somewhat progressive in a sense cause the wife does have equal title and position, but not progressive because what if the wife felt another occupation was her calling? Refer to this cause I'm going to go back to this.)
I've already shared a lot of the criticism I received from various key members of this organization on the aforementioned blog entry, and some of their "quirks," but it seems like the quirks are ever expanding.
When I "officially" left at the end of 2001, there were a lot of whispers and speculation of where I was going to end up. I left a message on the end of my letter acknowledging them as my "1st church family," and that I leave "with no ill-will towards anyone." When I received a message from the Territorial Director of Program that I "fell short of the higher standard of Christ," I suspected that though I share no ill-will, the opposite may not be true. That was confirmed when I learned that I was a center topic of discussion shortly after my departure amongst my previous study group. Now of course my study group was going to discuss my departure, it's just that the added twist was the attendance of the Corps Officers themselves. That's when I learned that the officer commented with a sarcastic tone that he "hopes I find what I'm looking for."
Now that I've been studying and learning about New Thought Practical Christianity, I feel a breath of fresh air and a sense of freedom, however I also am aware that there still lies an emotional bondage I developed as a result of my time with SA. Slowly and surely, those layers are thankfully coming off. Gone is the need to inquire about whether or not a business person is a Christian before conducting a transaction with them. In fact I recall that it was "a good idea" to use those who advertise on KFAX. (A Christian talk show station) So after following suit I learned the hard way that just because a business declares their Christian belief, that doesn't necessarily means their business practices are "Christ-like."
Now another aspect of The Salvation Army is their propensity to assign the corps officers to different assignments. They nickname this procedure as "the move." This is when around the month of May corps officers learn if they're going to be re-assigned to another location. Having visited a corps with several different officers in charge within a seven year period, one should not be surprised at the general surface small talk, lack of a connection mentality amongst the congregants. Having visited a "final service" of a corps officer who was being "moved," what I witness was not an encouraging sight.
When a corps officer couple went through a divorce, the husband adamantly wanted to remain as the corps officer. Because of the divorce, not only did he lose his position, he lost his other benefits as well. It was believed that they were not "truly called" as corps officer since they could not hold their marriage. Eventually the Army "rehired" the husband as an "Envoy" (not full benefits as an officer) since they were short-handed finding officers.
I also shared an experience where I was openly criticized about my "quiet time." That's a time which consist of anywhere between 10 minutes to up to 120 minutes of Bible reading/studying and personal prayer time. Upon my return and learning about "quiet time," I often closed my day before bedtime. After an incident involving myself, I was accused of not having a "quiet time" otherwise the incident wouldn't have occurred. I was then grilled on what I did and how I performed my "quiet time." When they learned that I did so at the end of the day, they concluded that the incident occurred because I did not conduct that time in the morning. Eventually my quiet times became less and less.
Our Sunday school instructor was the brother in law of the then corps officers. He often interject his opinion on how "sinful" it was to not honor the boycott of Disney. (This was during the Ellen De Generes controversy) Ironically enough, The Salvation Army was sponsoring a Salvation Army Day at Disneyland. He was also the same one who linked any struggle that the male congregants experienced to whether or not they attended an annual event called The Promise Keepers. The Promise Keepers was an all male Christian outdoor rally. If they struggled and did not attend, that's where the problem lies. If they struggled and did attend, they needed to make a commitment to register for the next one. It should not be surprising that one of the number one "struggle" within those who attended regularly were sexual and pornographic in nature. That aspect was so repressed so deep. Sadly, the single male members were singled out or "profiled" as being the highest "at risk" for such struggles.
When I was "baptized" into the Corps, it was really a "swearing-in" and a document signing ceremony. There was no water involved. The document itself included The Salvation Army's Articles of Faith. It also included a list of "I commit to..." One of them included an "I commit to abstaining from smoking, alcoholic beverage, and non-prescription drug consumption." So based on that declaration of commitment, drug-addiction within The Salvation Army is avoided right? Well, remember the key word(s) here are "NON-PRESCRIPTION" drug use. There's no problem as long as the doctor makes a prescription. So even though there were incidents of Corps officers who were abusing their prescription pain-killers, there was technically no problem since the doctor prescribed them.
Lastly, as a member of the Summer Service Corps program, I came and met a number of those who were openly recruited to become Corps officers in training. I'll admit even I once considered the possibility. Let me explain what Summer Service Corps is. During summer academic break, college age and young adults are recruited for a 6-8 week program to serve on behalf of The Salvation Army in a ministry, in most cases overseas. It's basically a summer mission. It's also a way to recruit for new corps officers. A territory would send 4-6 teams to different assignments. All teams report to the Territory center for orientation. (In my case, we were part of the Western Territory, located in Palos Verdes, California) I met quite a few people during that summer (1997) I even reconnected with some of them via Facebook in the past few years. Recently I learned that one of them whom I met through the orientation and the "debriefing session" (we served on different assigned teams) was suffering from substance abuse and suicidal tendency. Upon further inquiry, this person suffered from PTSS that was incurred during her assignment when we served in 97. The traumatic event she encountered was coming upon the levels of abuse the officer to whom she reported to during her assignment was committing. (Physical, sexual, and emotional) I don't know if she personally received that abuse or was a witness to it. If you think that the Catholic Church was guilty of scandals, then I'm sure The Salvation Army comes a very close second.
So why letting all of this come out now? Part of it is simply "housecleaning" for me. Tired of keeping all of this inside and not moving forward. Another reason is because of recent events coming to light. One of the former members whom I maintained contact with over the years was allegedly involved in a criminal investigation and mysteriously disappeared.
In dealing with the emotional abuse that I tolerated from this organization during my 7 years with them, I accept my responsibility of my part in it. As an institution who's public image is based on supposed "Christian qualities" and public perception, it's time to clean up and take a closer look in the mirror before condemning others. It's not so easy to practice what you preach after all. Stop sweeping the dirt under the rug and pretend that the dirt doesn't exist. When I spent time with the Territory Program Director back in '97, I was surprised and baffled when he mentioned to me of all the pending lawsuits against them.
Now I'm not as surprised.
10 July, 2012
My Confession
Today is July 10, 2012 at 6am PST. Normally I'm asleep until 9am
after going to bed around 2 or 3am. I awoke at 4:48am this morning
after going to bed around 2:30am. In other words, I barely had about 2
hours of sleep.
Since 1999, I pursued acting on every possible level: from audition notices on Backstage West, to Craigslist, to CSU Hayward Theater department and everything in-between. I did not call myself as a "professional actor" until I was actually paid for my performance on some commercial karaoke videos in 2001. I was cast in my 1st local commercial at the end of 2003, and my first lead role on a stage production in 2004. I "peaked" when I was cast as one of the leads on the independent film So Beauty. That was in 2005. During the filming, my mom passed away literally 20 minutes before call time. Since that point, I've struggled with ease and confidence on productions, auditions, even promotional events. Though I landed an agent based out of the San Francisco Bay Area in 2010, nothing had been handed to me easily.
On a personal level, my last relationship ended in the summer of 2004, and I went on my first date since that summer in July 2006. It didn't go too well. I dated again in the spring of 2007, and once again, it didn't go too well. It was disastrous enough that I sought out a personal development coach. I attended one of his retreats during my birthday week in the end of August. That was the start of my personal development journey.
In March 2008, I took The Basic Seminar, offered from PSI Seminars. That course enabled me to piece together my acting training, the personal development course I took in 2007, the sales and personal development courses I took during my 1st stint as a college student during the 1990s, and my church experience. I took all the following advanced courses offered by them. One of the unique benefits as a graduate is the opportunity to re-attend the Basic course at no charge, so I was able to review the elements of the class up to the present day. In the fall, PSI offers an advance course/convention called Principia where guest speakers are invited to teach. I attended the event in 2008, 09, 10, and 2011.
More recently in 2011, I made a spiritual transition of leaving the more mainstream evangelical form of Christianity and embraced what is considered "New Thought," which has been labeled as "Practical Christianity," "Spiritual," "Science of Mind," "Metaphysics Christianity," "Religious Science," "Unity" "Truth."
Yet, I have a confession to make.
With all that experience and new insights and achievements over the past 5 years, there is still an inner struggle I deal with day in and day out.
My "I AM" statement.
Personal development and New Thought really has an overlapping concept of the "I AM" theory. Not only is it a foundational spiritual statement. (In the Bible, God's "name" is Hebrew form of "I AM") In other words, an "I AM" statement is basically a self declaration belief about ourselves, and our concept of God simultaneously. So when I say, "I AM _____," I'm saying that I am this, AND my concept/belief about God (Divine, Universe, Infinite Intelligence, Allah, ect) is this.
An "I AM" statement can be empowering or it can be limiting.
My "I AM" statement(s) falls in the "latter" category.
In 1999, Crosswinds Church began a "post-modern, college, young career/family" ministry called "The Sanctuary." It was an evening service aimed for young adults and "the young at heart." That's when I befriended Peter Sleeper, who was the newly hired Executive Pastor of Crosswinds. He and I met on a regular basis, and he recommended a home study course by a Dr Eckman about identifying the "Sonship of God," and claiming yourself as the rightful Child of God. It was during that study when I came to the conclusion that I could never be a Child of God. I'm not, wasn't, and would never be.
"I AM God's mistake."
You see, I was placed for adoption even before I was born. Not only did I have the legal documentation to confirm that, I met my biological mother face-to-face who told me herself. I spent my childhood growing up with four main messages:
1) I was a mistake by my "real" parents.
2) I can or will be returned to the adoption agency if I didn't live up to standards.
3) Every family negative situation was MY fault. (I was often blamed for my parents health issues, my father's alcoholism, and for my younger cousin's misbehavior)
4) I was lovingly "chosen."
Yes, that 4th message did contradict the other three messages. It's funny about the "chosen" message and the fact that I "chose" a profession where I present myself to be "chosen" by casting directors, producers, ect. Bear in mind, the "lovingly chosen" was a mild form of manipulation of the expectation of gratitude I needed to openly express to the family who poured their heart and soul into raising me.
So this journey of the last 4-5 years was about letting go of a false "I AM" statement about myself as a "mistake," but I recently discovered a corollary "I AM" statement that was just as strong as the one I was dealing with.
"I AM worthless."
That tends to sabotage and cancels out a lot of intentions I've set and developed over the last few years. It not only undermines my financial and career goals, it also sabotages any sort of relationship goals.
Don't ask me what I am going to do about those beliefs, for I have just come to the realization of the 2nd one and it has surfaced very recently. I need to process what has been brought to my attention. I have a list of request to ask in support of the recent discovery:
1) Please don't demand that I "get over it." That only places additional pressure.
2) Please don't tell me to "not feel that way." How about if I tell you to NOT think about the pink elephant.
3) Sometimes your presence is worth more than the words you attempt to say. If I'm at a state of feeling and am not saying much, you need to say even less.
4) Don't let my smile fool you. I am an actor after all.
5) I acknowledge your Divinity, please acknowledge mine. In other words, let God reveal to me that those two "I AM" statements are not true. I know that already on an intellectual level. It needs to sink, root, and plant in the depth of my heart.
I am thankful for the support I've received over the years, the miracles that showed me differently, and tools I've learned to overcome such beliefs.
But I just need time. Time to process. Time to reflect. Time to let God show me the errors of my way.
Thank you in advance.
Since 1999, I pursued acting on every possible level: from audition notices on Backstage West, to Craigslist, to CSU Hayward Theater department and everything in-between. I did not call myself as a "professional actor" until I was actually paid for my performance on some commercial karaoke videos in 2001. I was cast in my 1st local commercial at the end of 2003, and my first lead role on a stage production in 2004. I "peaked" when I was cast as one of the leads on the independent film So Beauty. That was in 2005. During the filming, my mom passed away literally 20 minutes before call time. Since that point, I've struggled with ease and confidence on productions, auditions, even promotional events. Though I landed an agent based out of the San Francisco Bay Area in 2010, nothing had been handed to me easily.
On a personal level, my last relationship ended in the summer of 2004, and I went on my first date since that summer in July 2006. It didn't go too well. I dated again in the spring of 2007, and once again, it didn't go too well. It was disastrous enough that I sought out a personal development coach. I attended one of his retreats during my birthday week in the end of August. That was the start of my personal development journey.
In March 2008, I took The Basic Seminar, offered from PSI Seminars. That course enabled me to piece together my acting training, the personal development course I took in 2007, the sales and personal development courses I took during my 1st stint as a college student during the 1990s, and my church experience. I took all the following advanced courses offered by them. One of the unique benefits as a graduate is the opportunity to re-attend the Basic course at no charge, so I was able to review the elements of the class up to the present day. In the fall, PSI offers an advance course/convention called Principia where guest speakers are invited to teach. I attended the event in 2008, 09, 10, and 2011.
More recently in 2011, I made a spiritual transition of leaving the more mainstream evangelical form of Christianity and embraced what is considered "New Thought," which has been labeled as "Practical Christianity," "Spiritual," "Science of Mind," "Metaphysics Christianity," "Religious Science," "Unity" "Truth."
Yet, I have a confession to make.
With all that experience and new insights and achievements over the past 5 years, there is still an inner struggle I deal with day in and day out.
My "I AM" statement.
Personal development and New Thought really has an overlapping concept of the "I AM" theory. Not only is it a foundational spiritual statement. (In the Bible, God's "name" is Hebrew form of "I AM") In other words, an "I AM" statement is basically a self declaration belief about ourselves, and our concept of God simultaneously. So when I say, "I AM _____," I'm saying that I am this, AND my concept/belief about God (Divine, Universe, Infinite Intelligence, Allah, ect) is this.
An "I AM" statement can be empowering or it can be limiting.
My "I AM" statement(s) falls in the "latter" category.
In 1999, Crosswinds Church began a "post-modern, college, young career/family" ministry called "The Sanctuary." It was an evening service aimed for young adults and "the young at heart." That's when I befriended Peter Sleeper, who was the newly hired Executive Pastor of Crosswinds. He and I met on a regular basis, and he recommended a home study course by a Dr Eckman about identifying the "Sonship of God," and claiming yourself as the rightful Child of God. It was during that study when I came to the conclusion that I could never be a Child of God. I'm not, wasn't, and would never be.
"I AM God's mistake."
You see, I was placed for adoption even before I was born. Not only did I have the legal documentation to confirm that, I met my biological mother face-to-face who told me herself. I spent my childhood growing up with four main messages:
1) I was a mistake by my "real" parents.
2) I can or will be returned to the adoption agency if I didn't live up to standards.
3) Every family negative situation was MY fault. (I was often blamed for my parents health issues, my father's alcoholism, and for my younger cousin's misbehavior)
4) I was lovingly "chosen."
Yes, that 4th message did contradict the other three messages. It's funny about the "chosen" message and the fact that I "chose" a profession where I present myself to be "chosen" by casting directors, producers, ect. Bear in mind, the "lovingly chosen" was a mild form of manipulation of the expectation of gratitude I needed to openly express to the family who poured their heart and soul into raising me.
So this journey of the last 4-5 years was about letting go of a false "I AM" statement about myself as a "mistake," but I recently discovered a corollary "I AM" statement that was just as strong as the one I was dealing with.
"I AM worthless."
That tends to sabotage and cancels out a lot of intentions I've set and developed over the last few years. It not only undermines my financial and career goals, it also sabotages any sort of relationship goals.
Don't ask me what I am going to do about those beliefs, for I have just come to the realization of the 2nd one and it has surfaced very recently. I need to process what has been brought to my attention. I have a list of request to ask in support of the recent discovery:
1) Please don't demand that I "get over it." That only places additional pressure.
2) Please don't tell me to "not feel that way." How about if I tell you to NOT think about the pink elephant.
3) Sometimes your presence is worth more than the words you attempt to say. If I'm at a state of feeling and am not saying much, you need to say even less.
4) Don't let my smile fool you. I am an actor after all.
5) I acknowledge your Divinity, please acknowledge mine. In other words, let God reveal to me that those two "I AM" statements are not true. I know that already on an intellectual level. It needs to sink, root, and plant in the depth of my heart.
I am thankful for the support I've received over the years, the miracles that showed me differently, and tools I've learned to overcome such beliefs.
But I just need time. Time to process. Time to reflect. Time to let God show me the errors of my way.
Thank you in advance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)