CindiK

Extremely Random Friday Five (RevGalBlogPals)

2012-05-11T14:23:20Z

Here are my answers to RevGalBlogPals extremely random Friday Five:

1. What is the first thing that comes to your mind (right now) that you want to share about yourself.

Oddly, there's little I feel I need to share at the moment. I'm a little sunburned from our retreat yesterday.

2. What is your favorite piece of jewelry or accessory? Why?

I'm not big on jewelry, but I like my UCC cross triumphant and orb.

It looks different from other crosses, and I get asked about it a lot, which gives me a chance to talk about the United Church of Christ.

3. If you could have a starring role in a T.V. show/movie/series, which one would it be, and what would your character be like?

Doctor Who. I'd be happy to be a slightly wacky companion, but I'd like to be the Doctor - if for no other reason, so that there would be a female incarnation for once.

4. What is one thing you will eat this weekend?

Almost certainly, a hamburger.

5. How do you waste time? (If you do, that is...)

Blogging.

Is Misogyny Christian?

2012-04-23T23:00:00Z

Two articles came my way this morning.

In a New York Times article, "The Ripped, Bikini-Clad Reverend", the Reverend Doctor Amy Richter tells of her feelings around a bikini and her entry as a female body-building competition, as well as being told she (at 5'10") is too petite to be a priest. Others said it would be "too weird" to see her at the altar if she were pregnant and wondered whether a priest should be allowed to hold hands with her husband.

What is it about the female body that so frightens the church? Is it a fear of powerful, intelligent women? Is it a fear of women's bodies themselves?

I don't think we can chalk it up merely to the mystery of women, because women, too, are among those who have objected to women in church leadership. Women know about women, and yet some still are uncomfortable with female clergy.

Nearly a century after the right of women to vote was recognized in the USA, there is still a gulf in expectations of what men and women can - and should - do. And it is not merely a divide with privileged men on one side and oppressed women on the other; both men and women buy into these expectations in varying degrees.

In the Internet Monk post "'Esau' Christianity? Douglas Wilson Needs a Bible Study," Chaplain Mike takes issue with Mark Driscoll's attack on "effeminate" male worship leaders and Douglas Wilson's attack on "effeminate" worship services. For Wilson, to be masculine is to have images of battle, judgment, and wrath.

Is violence the hallmark of masculinity? We certainly see violence in masculine-identified sports such as boxing and hockey, and images of war in American Football. But if masculinity is defined as physical conflict, what do we do with clergy, scientists, mathematicians, musicians, engineers, accountants, salesmen, clerks, letter carriers, and dozens of other men in non-combative occupations? Must musicians smash their instruments like the rock band The Who? Must our clergy call their male parishioners to physical violence against the enemy? Does this line of reasoning support events like the church shootings over the past few years?

So what would Jesus do, anyway?

When the days drew near for him to be taken up, he set his face to go to Jerusalem. And he sent messengers ahead of him. On their way they entered a village of the Samaritans to make ready for him; but they did not receive him, because his face was set toward Jerusalem. When his disciples James and John saw it, they said, "Lord, do you want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?" But he turned and rebuked them.
-Luke 9:51-55

So is Jesus effeminate? If so, maybe Christianity is more feminine than masculine!

In Driscoll's and Wilson's search for authentic Christianity, they have confused it with gender stereotypes. Christianity ought not mean being physically strong, aggressive, violent, are brutal. Neither, however, is maleness. Rev. Dr. Amy Richter shows that women can be strong. And, as a my female hockey-playing friends can attest, women can be aggressive. If one reads the news, one can find many examples of violent and brutal women.

Both the fear of women as clergy and the fear of effeminate male clergy are rooted in the same two falsehoods: that women are inherently less than men, and that the Holy is intrinsically male. Neither is the case, and both falsehoods are harmful to both men and women, as well as people who do not identify at either end of this socially-constructed binary. It is also harmful to Christianity, as it deprives the body of Christ of the richness and diversity that is inherent in God's creation.

The Lord's prayer includes the line "Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven". Let us not instead impose on heaven what we privilege on Earth. And, perhaps with time, we will learn not to privilege on Earth that which is not privileged in Heaven.

Our Sacred Stories

2012-04-17T17:11:08Z

I am organizing a small retreat in Princeton Illinois for GLBTQ people. We'll have fellowship, meditation, and tell the sacred stories of our own lives.

The retreat will run June 8-10. Friday evening will be a time to register and meet each other (snacks provided).

On Saturday, we will have several workshops to help us tell our stories in different ways - writing, drawing/painting, singing, etc. Attend one or more workshops that resonate with how you want to tell your story - don't feel obligated to be at all of them. Three meals will be provided on Saturday.

On Sunday morning, breakfast will be provided, then we will have a worship service that incorporates some of the stories we have told.

Registration is limited to 20 double occupancy.

There is a flyer attached.
OurSacredStoriesFlyer.pdf

Where is the soul in the body? Maybe we have it backwards.

2012-04-09T18:26:15Z

So I've been thinking about eternal souls that transcend time and space and temporal bodies that occupy specific time and space. If you think of time as a dimension, our lives become four dimensional. Now, since we have trouble understanding four dimensions, imagine for the moment that we all look like Flat Stanley.

If we took photos of every moment of our lives, we'd have a bunch of flat representations of us, just like Flat Stanley. If we stacked them in order on top of each other, we'd have a three-dimensional representation, with the height of the stack being time. We would be small at the bottom (as infants) but larger as we went forward in time. Some of us might get smaller at points, too, as we lose weight.

My point here is that our bodies are four dimensional if we include the time that we are alive. If our souls, however, are eternal, then they're not going to be fixed at one place and time, but transcend it.

If you read some of my posts about creation as story, you're familiar with the idea that our temporal lives may be characters improvised in God's great work. If so, then our souls are the actors, and our temporal lives the characters.

That means our lives (characters) are part of our souls (actors).

So what would this mean?

Well, it might mean that our lives as we know them are part of our whole selves (souls) the way our heads, arms, legs, etc. are part of our temporal bodies. And that offers an interesting possibility:

Just as my hand (for instance) has a certain length, width, and depth, so my life has dimensions as part of my whole self. That doesn't make the flesh worse than the spirit, nor better than it. The flesh is an important part of my whole - perhaps of my soul itself.

And if my life is a part of my soul, for me to intentionally cut it short would be to amputate part of my whole self. Likewise, to extend my life past its useful length doesn't make a whole lot of sense either.

This line of reasoning leads me to value my life as an important - perhaps essential - part of my whole being, while recognizing that it is only a part of my whole.

It also leads me to value of the lives of others, while recognizing that death is only an edge of this part of others - opposite the edge of birth.

Maybe this cosmos is not our home - maybe it's more like a hat, glove, shirt, or shoe that covers the part of our being that lives here.

My last words on homosexuality and Christianity, part 5

2012-04-08T00:15:00Z

On Sunday, I'm shutting up about homosexuality and the Bible for a year.

There are people who go much farther in depth on the issue of homosexuality and the Bible. If you really want to learn about what scholars are saying, there are books, videos, academic papers, and articles on the worldwide web.

But if you have made up your mind already, there's not much I can say to you. Instead, I suggest you take a page from Jesus' ministry:

Jesus ate with people who were considered unclean sinners. If you want to follow Jesus, have dinner with a sinner. If you don't think think gay people can be Christians, ask one to lunch. Rather than quoting scripture at us, get to know us, and let us get to know you. Who knows? Maybe your example of piety will convict us of our sin. Of course, it's also possible that you will find we are not the sinners you think we are.

Are you willing to risk it? I am.

If you're gay and Christian, join me on my year of being out and not defending homosexuality.

If you're Christian and think homosexuality is a sin, join me in a year of meeting each other where we are.

Jesus said:

"I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." - John 13:34-35, NRSV

I love you, too.

My last words on homosexuality and Christianity, part 4: Jesus

2012-04-07T18:15:00Z

On Sunday, I'm shutting up about homosexuality and the Bible for a year. So this is a series of comments to get this out of my system. I this post: Jesus.

Yep.

Jesus said nothing about homosexuality.

My last words on homosexuality and Christianity, part 3: Paul

2012-04-07T12:15:00Z

On Sunday, I'm shutting up about homosexuality and the Bible for a year. So this is a series of comments to get this out of my system.

Romans 1:26-27

Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

With regard to women "exchanged natural for unnatural". This is the single place that could possibly be lesbianism, but it doesn't actually say that. In fact, it's not very specific at all.

With regard to men, it does say that men were consumed with passion for one another, and committed shameless acts. The acts are not specified. Is it mere lust? Or committed relationships?

These are also the consequences of idolatry - people who turned from God to worshiping idols. But what of people who are believers and who follow the words of Jesus, and are in committed same-sex relationships?

It's also important to recognize that this is a letter from an apostle to a church. It's not prophecy. It's not the red-letter words of Jesus.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11

Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers--none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

Male prostitutes, sodomites. We know Paul didn't say "sodomites" because that word was invented in the late 14th century. What did he really say? These words are translated from the Greek word arsenokoites.What does arsenokoites really mean? It's hard to say. It can be translated a lot of ways, including rape or incest. The same word gets used in 1 Timothy 1:9-10.

Most people read the translations rather than the Greek, and receive the translator's understanding of the words. Most people have already been taught that homosexuality is against God's law. We don't always realize the biases that we and others bring to the text.

My last words on homosexuality and Christianity, part 2: Leviticus

2012-04-07T06:15:00Z

On Sunday, I'm shutting up about homosexuality and the Bible for a year. So this is a series of comments to get this out of my system.

This is going to be really short.

Leviticus is the law of the Levites, the priestly tribe of Israel. The law covers food, worship, sex, and a lot about when women are unclean and have to be set apart from others (during and after their periods, after childbirth, etc.)

Yes, it says that man shall not lie with man as with a woman. What does that mean? Is it about male dominance over females and that men shouldn't be that way with other men? Is it about the victors raping those they defeated in battle? Is it about consensual sex?

If you're going to make Leviticus your guide to life, be sure to read the rest of it. Pay attention to the dietary restrictions, and the fabric blends. When you have those down, come and talk to me about how a committed relationship between two people of the same sex is what Leviticus is talking about, and that it applies to contemporary Christian believers.

My last words on homosexuality and Christianity, part 1: Sodomy

2012-04-07T00:14:45Z

On Sunday, I'm shutting up about homosexuality and the Bible for a year. So if Easter begins my year-long fast, I better get my fat-Tuesday on now.

First, Sodomy:

There are a whole lot of words that get tied to stuff in the Bible even though the connection is tenuous at best. Look up "Onanism". A lot of people use this as a synonym for masturbation, but look up Genesis 38 and read what Onan was supposed to have done - used the withdrawal method to avoid giving his brother's widow a child. How does that turn into masturbation? Onan's seed spilled on the ground. At some point, someone probably misunderstood what Onan had done wrong. The sin was that he disobeyed God by refusing to give his brother's widow a child, but someone probably thought the sin was spilling his seed on the ground. Next thing you know, it's any ejaculation outside of a vagina, and then it's masturbation.

So we have sodomy. These days, sodomy most often means homosexuality, but not so long ago it meant non-vaginal intercourse between a man and either a woman or another man. This included fellatio and anal sex. Go back farther, and it's a connection to Sodom being a hotbed of sexual sin. But where in the Bible does it actually say that?

A lot of people point to Genesis 19 where the men (or people, depending on translation) of the town come to Lot's place and demand that he bring out the strangers so they may "know" the men. Of course, "know" means "have sex with", right?

Well, maybe.

I have not painstakingly gone through the Bible and looked at every example of sexual congress, but I have seen three common ways of describing sex: know, enter into, and lie with. The cases of "know" with which I am familiar are about consensual sex within marriage. "Enter into" usually means the same. "Lie with" shows up in places like Deuteronomy 22: "the man seizes her and lies with her" - usually meaning rape or prostitution.

I don't think the townspeople wanted to be married to the strangers.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and sometimes know just means know. In the chapter prior to the altercation with Lot, the phrase "I know him" (using the same Hebrew word, yada) appears. It's actually part of the same story. Another example of homosexuality?

You decide.

Here, in Genesis 18:19, it is God speaking about Abraham. (Your translation may use chosen or some other word, but most translations use know, because the Hebrew word is yada.) If you're going to say "know" always means sex - even just in this story, then you're saying God has sex with Abraham. I don't think you want to say that.

In Ezekiel 16:46-50, Ezekiel is speaking for God (see 16:1. "The word of the Lord came to me:"). He's comparing Jerusalem to Samaria and Sodom. We especially want to look at 16:49-50 (from the New Revised Standard Version):

This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty, and did abominable things before me; therefore I removed them when I saw it.

Look at that list of sins:

Pride
Did not aid poor and needy despite excess of food and prosperous ease
Haughtiness
Did abominable things before me

"aHA!" some people will say. "Abominations! That's the homosexuality!"

Could be.

Or they could be worshiping idols (Deuteronomy 7:25, Deuteronomy 13:14). Or engaging in temple prostitution (I Kings 14:24). Or using dishonest weights in commerce ((Deuteronomy 25:13-19, Proverbs 11:1)). Or any of a number of other things called abomination (Hebrew to'ebah).

Yes, Jude 1:7 mentions fornication and strange flesh, but does that mean homosexuality? Or sex with people outside one's tribe? Or prostitutes?

I'm not saying it's impossible for Sodom to be about homosexuality. I just don't find the arguments very persuasive.

My Year-long Fast

2012-04-04T17:00:00Z

A lot of people are fasting during lent. I'm doing something, too, but I'm not going to make a big deal out of it.

Yet I am planning a year-long fast, and it begins on Easter.

"Easter?" you might ask. "Easter is a FEAST time, not a fast time!"

Indeed, it is.

Easter is a day of celebration, of resurrection, of promise, of transformation. It's the first day of the Easter season, which runs for seven weeks through Pentecost, the traditional birthday of the church. And it is in this time that I will begin my fast.

I'm fasting from the homosexuality and church debate.

More below the fold.
]]>
Not only is the argument fruitless, but there is a inherent power differential. Those who say the Bible condemns homosexuality also dismiss any different understanding of the Bible. There's a circular argument that goes something like this:

The Bible says homosexuality is wrong.
If you disagree with this, it means you don't understand the Bible.
Therefore, any counter-argument you make is invalid.
I am correct that the Bible says homosexuality is wrong.

No discussion comes from this sort of argument.

Those opposed to homosexuality also have "no skin in the game". The acceptance or rejection of homosexuality has no effect on heterosexuals. Oh, sure, I've heard the arguments about family values, and how marriage equality destroys the sanctity, meaning, and value of marriage, but seriously: will convincing me that I'm inherently sinful for being gay going to change your life? No.

But I do have a lot of skin in the game - my whole being. My body is at risk, because people are physically and sexually assaulted and even murdered for being gay. My family is at risk because people's relationships are disrespected and treated as irrelevant by the church and state because they're gay. My spirit is at risk because people are turned away from ordination, lay leadership communion, and even church membership for being gay.

And those of us who are gay and Christian are greatly outnumbered by Christians who condemn homosexuality.

Put all this together, and it comes down to be a battle with invulnerable people who outnumber me, while I put myself on the line with little personal defense.

So on Good Friday. I will make my last comments in this argument. They'll appear every few hours over Friday and Saturday.

On Easter Sunday, I'm going to begin a liturgical year of not entering into this fruitless argument and see how that feels.

But don't assume that I'm done witnessing.

The only thing that has ever worked for me in persuading that homosexuality is not some great evil is by establishing relationships with people. I'm going to be out as gay and Christian. I'm going to be out as trans and Christian. And when someone tries to engage me in the argument by saying "the Bible says homosexuality is wrong" or "God hates fags", I'll smile and say "I love you, too."

On Easter, I'm going to try to be a resurrected, transformed Cindi who doesn't have to push back against those who condemn her, who instead tries to draw people in.

I don't know that it will work, but it's worth a year of my life to try.

To my friends

2012-03-18T03:08:58Z

I actually have a lot of friends, and not just "Facebook friends" that I met through the Vampire Gangster Wagon Train of Farmville.And I really appreciate the support you've given me over the years.

I want to thank all of the people of faith who saw something in me and encouraged me. I appreciate your kind words and your presence, especially in times when I had doubts (and there have been many.)

I especially want to thank the people who have left the Christian church, those of other faiths, those who no longer count themselves as believers, and those who identify as atheists. While all the support I have received is cherished, many of you have given me the highest honor I believe a human being can give to a person who dares to do ministry: you have found in my ministry something that you can hold onto, and have thanked me for it in one way or another.

Some of you have said that, if I had a church, you would go to it. Others have remarked that if anyone could bring you back to the faith, it would be me, Still others have read something in a blog post, or in a sermon, and found something of value in it.

More than a decade down this road toward ordained ministry, I am still surprised by people who find something inspirational in what I do or say. This feedback is what helps keep me going when I get weary. And when I feel completely stuck, when I feel I cannot go any farther, I hear from one of my friends that doesn't believe as I do, who doesn't pray as I do, and yet still found something in my words or deeds.

This very grateful seminarian wants to thank all of you for how you've ministered to me.

What Kind of Christians Are We?

2012-02-26T16:10:00Z

HOPE UCC Sermon_2-26-12 from Hope United Church of Christ on Vimeo.

When I was five years old, my family went on a summer vacation to Miami Florida.

We stayed in a motel with a pool - you can't be in Miami in summer without a pool - and I paddled around in it wearing a life jacket.

One day I ran in and found the water a bit higher on me than I expected. I realized I didn't have the life jacket and started paddling to turn around and get out of there. As I came up the steps, my mom beamed: "You were swimming!"

I said "I was drowning!"

I was afraid to go back into the water.

Water.

Swimming.

Floods.

Baptism.

Why are we talking about this in Lent, and what does it have to do with caterpillars and butterflies?

]]> Lent is a time of fasting, reflection, repentance, and preparation. The last week of Lent begins with Palm Sunday, which is a feast day, goes through Good Friday, and ends when Easter brings us a new liturgical season.

It's this last week in Lent that got me thinking:

Three days - Palm Sunday, Good Friday, and Easter - are important to all Christians, but many of us seem to resonate more with one than the others.

For example, there are some of us who are what I would call

Palm Sunday Christians:

"Jesus is our King" Christians,

"Hosanna in the Highest" Christians,

"I have decided to follow Jesus" Christians.

Some people - like my professor Ted Jennings,

make sure they find a Good Friday service each year.

We have "Christ Crucified" Christians,

"He chose the nails" Christians,

"Jesus died for my sins" Christians.

And there are others for whom Easter is the big day:

Resurrection Christians,

"stone rolled away" Christians,

"woman why do you weep?" Christians.

So what kind of Christians are we?

How many of us are Easter, resurrection, new life and new possibilities Christians?

How many of us are Good Friday, Jesus died for us, crucifixion Christians?

How many of us are Palm Sunday, Hosanna in the Highest, following Jesus the King Christians?

The interesting thing about Holy Week is that it reflects back on us.

In the Gospel according to Matthew, and in the Gospel according to Luke, Jesus said

"If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me."

So if we want to be Palm Sunday Christians and follow Jesus, we have to become Good Friday Christians and take up our crosses, and that will lead us to become transformed Easter Christians.

Maybe that's why today's readings mention baptism and water:

there's a part about making a decision,

there's a giving up of some measure of comfort or safety,

and a promise of new, transformed life.

Like a caterpillar, when it is ready, creates a chrysalis and, in a way, dies to its old self, only to emerge renewed;

Like baptism, where we may become ready to symbolically die to our old ways and be reborn as something new;

as Palm Sunday Christians, we want to follow Jesus a little more closely, give up a little of our comfort or safety, and emerge closer to who we are intended to become.

That can be a scary thing to do.

Remember that story about the pool? My dad tried to cure my fear of water.

Some time that week, he picked me up, carried me to the deep end of the pool, walked across the diving board, and jumped in.

I screamed all the way into the water, where I started to take a breath and...

...well, it didn't cure my fear of water.

In fact, it was seven years before I overcame that fear enough to have water on my face in the shower.

There are things that can hold us back from our progress.

Sometimes, as in my first pool example, we go in on our own, without the help we need.

At other times, like the second example, we may not be ready, or not trust our help.

We may remember experiences that make it more difficult to trust the promise that we will emerge safely, and instead cling to our comfort and safety.

We may need a little time to - shall I say - catch our breath.

Seven years after I got over my fear of water, I made a decision to follow Jesus.

In the group I was with, we consecrated our lives to God.

That sounds pretty serious, and it was.

A Palm Sunday Christian, I found myself

in a pool,

at a motel,

in Beloit Wisconsin.

This time, I was ready to trust the man beside me who would fully immerse me in water, then bring me back up.

Symbolically, I was ready to die to my old self - to become a newer version of me.

One of the wonderful slogans used around the United Church of Christ is "No matter who you are, or where you are on life's journey, you are welcome here."

I like to think that we are all on such a journey.

Those of us who are Palm Sunday Christians will follow Jesus to the cross and become Good Friday Christians.

Those of us who are Good Friday Christians will give up a little of what holds us back and become new, transformed, Easter Christians.

And Easter Christians are better equipped to follow Jesus a little more closely than before, and become Palm Sunday Christians again.

Unlike the caterpillar and butterfly, we can go through this process many times in our lives.

Sure, we can pause at one of these places, but if we are to grow, we have to continue these small steps of transformation.

Over the next few weeks, we're going to hear many stories of transformation. My challenge to all of us is this:

that we would see where we are in the cycle,

see whether there is anything holding us back,

and, when we are ready, find our way to take that next step toward what God has dreamed us to be.

What kind of Christian was Jesus?

2012-02-21T21:15:18Z

As the contest to be the Republican nominee for President of the United States heats up, liberals and conservatives are arguing over what kind of theology is Biblical, Christian, and even what kind of Christian Jesus is.

Let me make this as short and direct as I can:

Jesus was not a conservative Christian.

Jesus was not a liberal or progressive Christian.

And maybe that makes sense out of the arguments today. One can claim that Ayn Rand, capitalism, tough love, and Christianity go together without having to bump up against the teachings of Jesus, because Jesus never claimed to be a Christian.

The way I read the Bible, Jesus seems to have been more on the social justice and income equality side than many of the teachers of the day.

So maybe that makes Jesus a liberal Jew.

Are We a Crucifixion or a Resurrection People?

2012-02-21T14:00:00Z

When there's a war, some soldiers don't come home alive. We may use the term "hero" for many soldiers, but we especially use it for those who gave their lives in battle.We used to celebrate when soldiers return alive, but these days those celebrations are a lot smaller.

In many churches, there seems to be a lot more focus on how Jesus gave his life for us when he was crucified. Yet the big celebration is on Easter, which is about the resurrection - Jesus returning alive.

The Parable of the Prodigal is a story about a child who asks for the inheritance while the parent still lives, cashes it in, and then spends the money with prodigality. When the child has spent the last bit of money and hit rock bottom, and decides to return home as a servant. the parent throws a party because the child "was once dead, but now is alive".

I have less of a point here than some questions:

Are we a people who primarily proclaim Christ crucified and celebrate that he died for our sins, so we get a pass?

Are we a people who primarily proclaim Christ crucified and celebrate that he died, and we should similarly take up our crosses

Are we a people who primarily proclaim Christ resurrected and celebrate that he has conquered death for us?

Are we a people who primarily proclaim Christ resurrected and celebrate that he has conquered death and recognize that we also must be renewed?

Are we a people who primarily proclaim what Jesus taught and, if so, do we need to follow it? Teach it?

Are we a people who primarily proclaim how Jesus lived and, if so, do we need to live it?

I guess my question really is: are we a people of death, life, knowledge, or living?

As we move into Lent, I'm going to be meditating on Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, and how that informs my life.

Kevin Smith and the Trinity

2012-02-17T18:06:12Z

Yes, that Kevin Smith.

Yes, that Trinity.

One of my favorite films is Dogma. This will surely make some of you concerned for my soul, others of you happy that I thought this was a clever film, and cause yet others of you to say "what is Dogma?"

Dogma is only one of several movies where Smith wrote, directed, and played a role (others are Clerks, Mall Rats, Chasing Amy,Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, and Clerks II).

As the writer, Kevin Smith creates a world. Yes, you may argue that his story exists in this world, but I disagree. There may well be a Bethany Sloan in this world, but she is not the Bethany Sloan of Dogma. Likewise for Cardinal Glick. The events in the Dogma world never happened in our world.

Kevin Smith is the creator of a universe.

Not only is Smith the creator, but his timeline is independent of the Dogma timeline. Smith sees the beginning, end, and middle of Dogma universe as one whole. Smith's pen arrives at any point in the USA at any time, because the time and space of the Dogma world have no claim on Smith.

But Smith is not content to merely create a universe. No, he becomes a part of it. Smith creates a character - Silent Bob - which inhabits the created Dogma universe. And then Smith is the soul that inhabits the Silent Bob character.

To the Dogma universe, Silent Bob is Smith incarnate.

Is Silent Bob the same as Smith? Yes, and no. Yes, the soul of the creator Smith lives out the character of Silent Bob, but no, Silent Bob is not independent of the Dogma time and space. And if the creator Smith were to decide that the Silent Bob character should die, the death would only be of the Silent Bob character and only in the Dogma universe - it would have no claim on the creator Smith.

Complicated? You bet. But Smith (as well as many other writers) has done this in many films.

Yet we're not done. Smith not only creates the universe and the characters within it, not only become the incarnation of Smith call Silent Bob, but Smith wants to speak to the souls that give life to the characters.

Smith takes on the role of director in Dogma. In doing so, he lives in the space between the timeless (to the Dogma universe) creator and the temporal created beings in the film. Director Smith speaks to the souls that inhabit the characters: Linda Fiorentino as she lives out Bethany Sloan's life, George Carlin as he lives out the life of Cardinal Glick, Jason Mewes as he becomes Jay, and yes, even Smith as he lives out Silent Bob.

Smith, as director, is the spirit that speaks to the souls that help to create the lives in the universe created by creator Smith. As director, Smith even speaks to the actor Smith as he lives out Silent Bob.

For those of you who haven't already closed this window and started praying for my immortal soul, let me assure you I am not saying Kevin Smith is our God. But Smith did create several universes, spoke to the souls that inhabited the lives in those universes, and even entered those universes to live among the creations.

Genesis 2 says humans are created in the likeness of God. If we can create whole worlds, and inhabit them with the beings we create, cannot God do so on a grander scale?

What if our creator is like an author, and Jesus like a life played out within that creation by our creator, and the Holy Spirit like that same entity with a foot inside our universe and a foot outside it?

Perhaps all the world is indeed a stage.