Been reading this book by Anne Lamott called Grace (Eventually). Been rough lately around here in my world. This quote gave me some courage.
In a fairy tale, you often have to leave the place where you have grown comfortable and travel to a fearful place full of pain, and search for what was stolen or confront the occupying villain; it takes time for the resulting changes to integrate themselves into the small, funky movements that make up our lives. (145)
I hope you all have a blessed day.
138 Comments(+Add)
I listened to an interesting and moving piece by Anne Lamott on a recent episode of “This American Life”. I believe, it was a repeat of an old episode.
She doesn’t get a lot of good press in certain sections of the Christian blogosphere, which is often but not always a sign that her work is worth looking at. Haven’t read any of her books but I will be interested in your overall impression on Grace (Eventually).
Will you recommend it, any reservations?
Robbo,
Yes. She is vulgar. She is pro-choice. She hates George W Bush. She has a jaded past. She likes the ‘f’ word.
But she, and her writing, are beautiful.
jerry
Yep. Nothing like a few good f-bombs to kick-start your morning devotion.
I also quote her in sermons.
She sounds like a 1 Tim 2:9-15 kinda of lady.
Dive by,
D. Kyle Christner
SDG
“She is vulgar. She is pro-choice. She hates George W Bush. She has a jaded past. She likes the ‘f’ word.”
“But she, and her writing, are beautiful.”
One of those statements is not true. When adults use language that you forbid your children to use then we can reject it. Unless you use it as well.
I’ve always been confused by making the big distinction between what adults do and children do.
Children don’t have sex, drive heavy machinery, drink alcohol, perform surgery, etc.
I’m not necessarily in favor of making all of those activities illegal.
Kids are kids and adults are adults. Is it that complicated an idea?
Adults lie – children shouldn’t
Adults curse – children shouldn’t
Adult’s smoke – children must wait
Adults look at porn – children can later
It isn’t about making anything “illegal”, it’s about being an example to those who look to us.
I agree that the issue is being an example. Completely.
But my point was that the question of whether you forbid your child to do something is *irrelevant* to whether your doing it constitutes a good or bad example.
For example:
Adults have sex, children shouldn’t.
And yet:
Adults should not kill people, nor should children.
See how far the whole “do I forbid my child to engage in activity ___” question get us?
It gets us almost nowhere.
The real question is “is it wrong?”
Gotta love the morality police. I agree being an example is something we all ought to do. Don’t worry, Rick, my kids won’t read Anne Lamott until they are old enough to appreciate such writing.
In her great book, Bird by Bird, she tells this story that still makes me laugh so hard I cry…
In a few brief paragraphs, Lamott tells a story about her son Sam, who was then very young—maybe four?—and his set of oversized, plastic keys. She writes that one day Sam went outside their front door and locked himself out of the house, and then proceeded to try to unlock the door with his toy keys. When he couldn’t fit the keys in the lock, she heard him say, “Shit.” When she opened the door she told Sam that both of them absolutely had to stop using that word right away. He said, “Okay,” but then asked, “Mom, do you want to know why I said ‘shit’?” Lamott said, “Yes,” and Sam replied, “It was because of those f***ing keys.”
HA!
Now that’s funny.
Chad, you are a pastor. I feel even worse for your people than I did before. May God have mercy.
I will leave you all to your version of Christlikeness.
The moral police.
Goodbye all and peace, I have mostly enjoyed my time here.
The very sad thing is that Chad has no qualms about writing what he just did – it’s all a big guffaw. And I can just see the rest typing furiously in his defense that curse words are simply a construction of our culture, to be outraged is pharasaical and Paul was not referencing this when he spoke of wholesome speech… blah, blah, blah.
The fact that this type of language is tolerated on a Christian blog is surprising and disappointing (not that it’s Chris L’s fault at all in this case).
What is more sad is that Chad has no hesitation. And the joke wasn’t even funny
Not a big Lamott fan, at all.
While I see that being the “language police” is counterproductive, and that our freedom in Christ allows us to use language as the need arises, rather than via a legalistic set of “good” and “bad” words, I think that Paul’s admonition about how to use that freedom wisely is largely ignored in much the same way as early Christians flaunted their freedom by eating idol-sacrificed meat brazenly in front of weaker brothers.
[FYI - I starred out a word above, just because I like maintaining a PG-13 atmosphere here, and do not want this showing up in searches, etc.]
Paul:
You won’t get a defense of anyone from me.
I will say this though… I’m amazed that the current vogue in Christian ethics is for people to be far more outraged that someone may *say* (fill in your most loathsome word), then if someone may actually *be* (fill in your most loathsome word).
Condescension, sarcasm, insults, accusing people of shoddy research when you’re the one who actually made the mistake, etc.
It’s all fine.
As long as you don’t use a naughty word.
I think I’ve been fairly consistent in supporting your point. I do not think we should dance around a set of “acceptable/unacceptable” words, and trot out the outrage meter when the language norms are broken, all the while engaging in foul language (in terms of content).
At the same time, I don’t see that careless use of language (as evidenced by Chad) is an acceptable position, either. It was pointless and unfunny.
Derek Webb recently recorded and released a song with the word s*** in it, using it in the same form as used by Tony Campolo in making a specific point. I had no problem with this, particular in light of the point being made. Above, though, is a perfect example of the words ‘gratuitous’ and ‘unnecessary’.
Paul, your sanctimony is so old.
I would FAR rather hang out with someone full of grace like Anne Lamott who has a flair for language before a self-righteous prude such as yourself. And I bet Jesus would, as well.
It is a funny story, which is why I shared it. (Ok, I admit – I also knew it would make certain people sound the alarm)
Chris L, I don’t mind you bleeping out the word. Why not the word “shit”? I guess everyone’s “You’re-Dambed-O-Meter” is set at different levels.
Chad – historically, I’ve only bleeped a couple of words, generally following the “PG-13″ criteria for movies…
As language is concerned, it is primarily the audience to whom you are communicating that should be taken into account.
I do not see specific words as “sin issues”, but rather ones of wisdom, politeness and tact.
I this particular case, I fail to see how any of those three tests is met, particularly since you acknowledge:
In the cases of a clinical discussion on words, specific teaching discussions, etc., I can see the usefulness in inclusion of certain words. In the case of Lamott, I’ve often questioned the wisdom/usefulness of some of her choices, just as I do in the somewhat pointless story shared above…
Well, then perhaps you’re missing the point.
I chose this story specifically because of RIck’s comment #6 to Jerry, where he said:
I could have chosen any number of stories or words. I chose this one because of its hilarity and cuteness (I mean, who among us have not laughed when a 4 year old says something they shouldn’t? If you wouldn’t have laughed at this you need to check your pulse) but I also chose it for its irony and shock value.
It could have led into a decent discussion about why Rick thinks a person who uses the ‘f’ word in literature can’t be a beautiful person or a beautiful writer. But, he fled.
In any event, it’s a word. If Rick is overly offended by a word then I apologize. Yet I would also challenge him if he were still here to grow up and think through the reasons he is offended rather than he and Paul C play the moral police card.
I don’t see anything funny or cute about a four year old using the “f” word. It’s a sad story on multiple levels.
My wife loved Anne Lamott’s book… but hates swearing… so what does that tell you? Maybe the Truth is greater than the profanity… Like with some OT prophets…
But really this is another stupid waste of time debating language and missing the message.
And so many miss what matters most….
Hi, I’m Rick. I missed the point.
Oh,
Hi, I’m Paul. I, too, have missed the point.
(No smiley for you; you should have learned from Rick’s mistake.)
The piece by Anne Lamott that I listened to had no swearing or profanity whatsoever and yet was interesting, beautiful and moving. The quote in the post above has no profanity.
If she can be interesting without the use of the “f” word and other words that may be a stumbling block to many people, why then does she find it necessary to be “profane” or “vulgar”? is it a form of art? Won’t her books be just as interesting without the profanity?
I’ll probably be reading one of the books anyway; I like the title “Grace (Eventually)” and maybe I’ll come back with a book report.
Robbo,
It’s not like she is cursing every other sentence. I think in the whole book I’ve seen it maybe three times. She is a writer, a pilgrim, she is telling us about her journey, her fears, her sins, the things that shape and have shaped her. And what she does is put them all into the hands of the Redeemer–Jesus.
She is mad about Jesus. Grace. Salvation. She is telling us the story of how the grace of God is constantly transforming her worldview, her people view, her faith view; how she goes from hate to love; how she is a sinner who has been redeemed from every conceivable sin known to man.
She wrote a beautiful book, using beautiful words, and telling beautiful stories.
She is telling us about how the grace of God reaches even her. I’ll read that book any day of the week; and do so happily.
She’s not for everyone. It’s hard to read about her hatred for this or her love for that. It is thrilling to read about how God redeems everything in her life.
jerry
She is like reading the story of Israel, foibles and all.
The beautiful thing about Israel is, unlike other national histories written in the same period, they do not attempt to cover up their mistakes or their “bad words.” They just….are. And God just…IS.
That is beautiful.
John Hughes’ comment and Kyle’s “Dive By” owe me a new computer screen. Hee, hee.
F**k, F**k, F**k.
Chris, stop forkin’ around.
Chad,
That’s just it. And that’s exactly why her story is beautiful.
jerry
This is such a James 3 moment…
#6: Rick, please be careful. Your comment comes close to resembling one of PB’s riffs where he denies others the same grace he so often claims for himself.
#10: Chad, when will/have posts like your comment here appear(ed) on your own blog? I’ve been noticing your comments here tend to get coarser each time you come back after saying you’re done with this site.
#13: Paul C, do you really need to paint with such broad strokes?
Who constitutes “the rest” rushing to Chad’s defense? Two words you chose to use took a comment I can otherwise agree with and created a bone of contention between us. Just kidding
. I’m using this as an example to show we’re all guilty of bad word selection. And if we’re all honest, we’ll admit that while some have managed to edit some words out of their vocabularies doesn’t mean we’re still not thinking them, which is just as bad (Mark 7:21, Luke 6:45).
I can take or leave Lamott; I’m certain whatever she has to say has been said elsewhere and elsewhen in better and worse ways, it’s all a matter of what lands.
I wonder sometimes if we think a bit too highly of our freedoms that we choose to be as crass and offensive as we want with no consideration of others. The cross is offensive; we don’t need to be offensive.
I’m sorry I was just in a “funk” so I thought I might “fork” the “fink”.
You know, I expect this kind of language on a golf course from my friends who are not believers in Jesus and whom I am sharing in their lives while speaking the truth to them.
I explain to them that their language does not bother me, except when it uses the God whose name is holy to me as a curse word.
I expect this kind of language from those whose lives have not been changed by the God of the universe. When your speech is marked by vulgarity, your lifestyle is one of liberty instead of love, then by your fruits you shall be known.
If a four year old child is modeling that speech, that is more a lifestyle than a slip of the tongue.
I guess I will be putting Lamont, no matter how ‘beautiful’ her writing is on the list of not worth my time. But go on quoting her in your sermons and laughing at her writing. ROmans 2 is lost on you.
nuff said.
Well, I don’t think this is what Paul was talking about when he was talking about unwholesome talk, at least not directly.
The thing about most of these swear words is that they all depend on the context. Of course I don’t think we should be teaching kindergartners to swear (although they learn soon enough), but there’s much more harmful things that I can think of that parents teach children that are socially acceptable.
I just think that an inordinate amount of hand-wringing is spent by Christians trying to clean up dirty mouths. Of all the issues to get upset this has to be down there with people putting the toilet paper on the roll backwards (everyone knows it’s up and over, not down and around…). OK, maybe it deserves a little more attention than that, but I honestly think God cares a lot more about the heart behind our words than the actual words themselves. And it’s totally possible to have a heart full of bitterness and hatred without uttering a “dirty” word once in your life.
I think that some bad words in our culture have become so ubiquitous that they almost have no meaning. It’s actually that part that bothers me most when authors revert to using them. It’s the equivalent of putting spinning rims on a car – it’s displays your lack of creativity to the world.
Jerry,
When was the last time a “Thought for the day” generated this much discussion?
Sandman, you are welcome to post your favorite Lamott story on my blog. If it happens to contain a cuss word – so be it.
Have you guys read the one where… nevermind.
I must say, I’m fascinated that various people on this blog go around treating each other like absolute garbage in the comments section. Filth. And no one hardly blinks.
But then someone drops a bad word, and you’d think the heavens were falling.
I personally also expect angry condescension, mental laziness, knee-jerk reactions, and logical fallacies from my non-Christian friends… in addition to the foul language of course.
I don’t think I expect the above from my non-Christian friends anymore than I am offended or surprised when I see it in my Christian friends. Well, maybe angry condescension….but the other stuff?
To me, when people have a “I’ll defend my position at any cost” mentality, it’s usually indicative of one thing. Fear.
I see a lot of behavior here that strikes me as coming from hearts that our absolutely ruled by fear. And that isn’t Christian.
agreed.
Or at least, it is indicative of a heart that hasn’t been perfected in love, yet.
Chad, I thought the Lamott story was funny. As Art Linkletter used to say, “Kids say the darndest things!”
A couple of thoughts.
First, no one here is advocating that children read Lamott. No one is advocating that children use the word ‘f***.’ It sounds like Lamott told a story that happened in her life and her son’s life. I remember one time using the word ‘hells-bells’ within a whisper of my mom’s right hand. It happened. We moved on.
Second, no one here is saying that everything she writes is wonderful. Then again, not everything written by anyone is always wonderful. It’s a book that is funny, full of grace. To get hung up on one or two words is to miss the bigger point of her writing.
She’s a pilgrim sharing her journey in Christ. It’s about what she has learned, how she has grown, where she has been. I appreciate her candor.
Third, I am not glorifying her choice of words. Words are words. They are language. They catch our attention and drive us crazy. They mean things. They are words.
Fourth, even though I started the whole thing with my comment about Lamott’s penchant for using coarse language, my post had nothing to do with that aspect of her writing or life.
Rather, I was saying that sometimes life throws us curve-balls, so to speak, and that change takes time. Like a fairy tale, sometimes.
Fifth, I’m not advocating that all of you rush right out and by Lamott’s books. The one I have cost $2.99 and was in the ‘bargain box.’ I got it because it was about grace. And if grace is demonstrated in the life of Anne Lamott, then, so to speak, there’s hope for us all.
PB, I’m much happier when you live in your fairy tale world and don’t bother dropping in on my mine. I seriously doubt you would know a good book if Jesus hit you in the head with it. On the other hand, I can appreciate that I continue to turn you off to good literature. I certainly wouldn’t want you ruining it by actually reading it and doing something stupid like writing a review. You will never get it John. Never.
jerry
Kenn,
thanks. My hunch is that the people who were so sour-faced in their comments really aren’t that boring in real life. At least, I hope not.
peace
The only specific cussing that I know of that is prohibited by Scripture is, as Pastorboy says, using the Lord’s name as a cuss word.
I think a case can be made that the Bible assumes a disciples language will be consistent with their calling in the Lord.
What is considered “cussing” is certainly culturally conditioned.
Just because something is culturally acceptable does not mean it’s best for the believers to do so.
Just because something is culturally unacceptable does not mean the believer has the freedom to do so as proof they are free from the culture.
Saying believers should not use language that the greater culture deems inappropriate is not necessarily morality policing – particularly when said language is unnecessary.
Is “morality police” always a bad thing?
It’s like stand-up comedy… as a rule… those who can be really funny without vulgarity are much more intelligent and better at the craft than those who do. It’s easy to be vulgar, it’s easy to shock, it’s much harder to make people laugh with intelligent humor.
I know not Ann Lamont… but I see no reason why a Christian writer would need to use the “f” word unless it was in a quote or for culturally accuracy.
Interesting – if we do not take humorous delight in a cussing four year old we are sour-faced?
Actually, I don’t think that is what God was getting at when God commands us not to use his name in vain.
Jerry,
The reason I took a sour-faced, potentially boring, morality police laden response is not because someone/anyone advocated children use highly offensive cuss words… it’s because it was deemed funny.
45 – Yes. It was a funny story. Lighten up.
I agree. I think there are ways in which people use the Lord’s name in vain that are much worse, and much more acceptable (humanly speaking) than as a cuss word (insert ODM refernce here as an example).
That said, I think using it as a cuss word is using it in vain.
#26 and
#42 (except the last paragraph)
Thanks Jerry. I think I understand what you are saying. There is something to be gained from her writing if one can get past the her use of profanity. Whether the vulgarity is gratuitous or necessary is up for some debate. I personally think it is completely unnecessary because she is probably gifted enough to challenge without causing offence to some of her fellow believers. I plan to read the book.
#35
no it is not, Phil. That is so unfair and I think this is a “logical fallacy attack” on any Christian who has spinning rims (apologies to MG). You have just put a damper on my plan to put new rims on my 9 year old car. Take it back, please.
#43. Chad,
Humor is partly cultural and environmental and I cannot demand that everyone find something I find funny to be funny too. It may have been funny to some people in the context Anne Lamott wrote it but I did not find it funny on this thread.
#12. In the words of the Governor of California, “He will be back”
Grace, eventually to all
Jerry,
I’ll amend this comment based on something you wrote… you said she’s a pilgrim sharing her journey in Christ. [her writting] is about what she has learned, how she has grown, where she has been. I appreciate her candor.
I can see the value in that. I can see how a believer who comes from a certain context would use course and vulgar language.
There comes a time though when maturity and deference to fellow believers kicks in and such things are either left behind, or sequestered to the subculture from when she came.
I’ve read only one of her books. I don’t know if Lamott would call herself a ‘christian writer.’ She is a woman who has experienced a lot of life–and a lot of life that needed redeemed, forgiven. She’s not perfect. She’s a person who is seeking grace, and finding it in Jesus. Hence the title, “Grace (eventually).” She found that grace in Jesus Christ. And despite her past, and present, she believes that He holds her future.
I simply refuse to brush off anything because it ‘offends.’ Jesus never condemned a book and never suggested that we shouldn’t read books. Jesus didn’t pray to the Father (in John 17) that we would be sheltered or taken out of the world, only that he would protect us from the evil one.
I choose the Bono view of things: “Grace makes beauty of ugly things.”
Or the Sarah McLachlan view: “you take me in
no questions asked
you strip away the ugliness
that surrounds me”
Or, “As she herself explains it, “Surfacing is about me finally growing up and facing ugly things about myself. We all have a dark side; it’s bullshit to say that we don’t. At some point we’re going to have to face that.” (McLachlan)
I just think some people are willing to confront the ugliness that has not been fully eradicated, and struggle with it, and win sometimes and lose sometimes, but also being fully aware of who they are in Christ and have a sense that also, every now and again, the ugliness is awakened and creeps out–in public. Proper theology is worked out publicly. I think Anne Lamott is a theologian, and a good one, because she understands that grace does not make us perfect, but it does perfect us.
This is why so many people do not like preachers like Rob Bell. He’s honest about what grace really means because he knows. These are the people, the dreamers, the believers, the candy-makers, the pilgrims who understand that after death is resurrection to newness of life and that, as the quote in my op notes: “…it takes time for the resulting changes to integrate themselves into the small, funky movements that make up our lives.”
The essence and beauty of Christian faith is that we refuse to write off anyone because they are imperfect. All that does is set us up to be judges and hypocrites. The beauty of grace is that God doesn’t ask us to be perfect while he is making us perfect; he doesn’t ask us to give up just because we fail; and He doesn’t stop just because we do.
jerry
You shall know them by their fruits? What does the fruit of that tree tell you?
oh yeah…the fruit…
love, no culturally determined “cuss words”, joy, no playing cards, peace, no drinking, patience, no rated R movies, rock music…
oy.
nc,
everyone knows that fruit is all about what you don’t do.
obviously Lamott is headed for hell because of her potty mouth.
For what it’s worth, the quote in the OP is kinda cool though…
Just because something is culturally acceptable does not mean it’s best for the believers to do so.
Just because something is culturally unacceptable does not mean the believer has the freedom to do so as proof they are free from the culture.
Just once it would be fun to have a conversation wherein people disagree w/o the specter of sarcastic hyperbole being introduced.
Man you guys are touchy. All I asked is what kind of fruit do you see displayed? Never accused or labeled anything. Maybe you should go buy a “jump to conclusion mat.”
We are to judge a person by there life for our protection and the protection of those within our flock. We need and must know who the wolves are. A grape tree does not produce thistles.
58: You said it better than I was about to, Neil.
That were sin is, Grace abounds and love covers a multitude of sin… and that we are not saved by works (cleaning ourselves up) but by grace through Christ CHOSEN by God…
But I guess that is all meaningless if someone uses unapproved words.
God’s fruit is what we are to look at and from what I know, Anne Lamott has a lot of God’s fruit flowing through her in spite of her humanness.
I wonder if some really believe we are saved by Grace? It seems the ones that are most offended mouth grace but ignore it when it matters.
And you’re accusing us of jumping to conclusions…
What in the world does Jerry’s post have to do with wolves and the flock, for cryin’ out loud. Anne Lamott is simply an author, and she’s a Christian. She’s not a pastor, or a teacher, and I don’t think she’d ever claim to be. Most of her books are novels.
Sheesh… bunch of very tightly wound people on the interwebs…
I don’t know the author nor have I read anything by her. That is why I ask.
Do you deny that those who God justified He will sanctify by the grace of God through faith in Christ?
Do not make the grace of God an excuse to sin! May it never be! Should I sin that grace may abound. By no means! May it never be!
Phil,
Yes I am. As soon as I mention fruit some start talking about legalism. Maybe not you personal. I don’t think I was responding to Jerry with my comments. Just making a genral comment on why juding them by their fruits is important. Sorry for any confusion.
Please answer me this.
Is a “jump to conclusion mat” a good idea? Sorry got to go someone just stole my red stapler.
Not at all…
I just don’t know how much of a barometer the lack of or use of “bad” words is of one’s sanctification. Some of the most godly people I know let one rip every now and then.
I also find it odd that having never even read anything by this author or really knowing nothing about her, you are so quick to judge her fruits. What exactly are you judging?
what a lousy mother if her son is saying sh..t and the f word at FOUR……the apple does not fall far from the tree
Phil,
“you are so quick to judge her fruits. What exactly are you judging?”
Please show me where in my comments I judge anyone are anything?
Nice pic:)
Are you dense? Seriously. Have you read anything that I have written about this author? Or in this thread?
I refer you to #52, #42, #26.
Seriously. Talk about paranoid hyperbole.
Was not talking to you Jerry. The quote of me was more directed at iggy with comment 61 and 62. everone needs to lighten up a bit. You guys do the samething you are acusing me of.
Did you guys not get the memo?
Jerry
Are you dense?
Seriously
Yes I am because I continue trying to communicate with people who just don’t get it. The OP is about the very sanctifying grace you think is missing in this conversation. Or did you miss that? How are the reading skills?
What is this logical fallacy called?
How are the reading skills? Are you dense? Seriously
What is this logical fallacy called?
Jerry.
I was not commenting on your OP or anything about the author. I was more commenting on the general flow of the comments. Cussing ect..Does it matter. I was just trying to though out some semi-related stuff just for a good conversation.
I am sorry. I did not realize I was upsetting you and others to the point of calling me names. I will stop.
Did you guys not get the memo?
Now you really have lost me. Once again proving that trying to communicate with people who already have their minds made up is impossible.
“Once again proving that trying to communicate with people who already have their minds made up is impossible”
What is this logical fallacy called?
has nothing to do with anything in the OP. You are trying to catch someone denying something you think is important, that is, you are looking for an ‘aha–gotcha’ moment. You are double-minded and do not have good conversation in mind at all.
#80–What the hell are you talking about?
Speaking for myself only:
I was simply objecting to the notion that it’s funny or cute or at all appropriate for a four year old to use the “f” word. Does it happen? – sure. Is it acceptable” – of course not.
I was simply commenting on the use of vulgarity by Christians in general. Does it happen? – sure. Is it acceptable” – of course not.
It was not my intent to question anyone’s reception of grace, or their fruit, or all the other tangential issues that have been brought up.
It is a good illustration on how grace works in our sanctification.
You keep on attacking me personal. What kind of logical fallacy is that called?
Again read what I have said. Why do you feel the need to call names from what I have said?
I have clearly stated myself I am not judging her because I have no clue that the author is and am therefore in no position to. Comment 64.
As I also stated the question was not directed at you jerry or the OP but more towards Iggy and what role fruit and holiness have in a Christian’s life. Again I apologize for upsetting you and others to the point of calling me names, which was not my intent. My intent was not to be “double minded” my intent was to have a good conversation while I have down time at work. Again I apologize.
So did you get the memO?
Ah! Yeah. It’s just we’re putting new coversheets on all the TPS reports before they go out now. So if you could go ahead and try to remember to do that from now on, that’d be great. All right!
When my eldest child was 2, I was putting him in his car seat when I dropped something. As the item hit the muddy ground, I went to say something I shouldn’t. Part way through the phrase I realized what that was and stopped myself, saying only “Oh”.
My adorable little boy looked up and me and said “crap mommy, crap”.
It was a moment that was really funny due to the odd discord between a cute boy and a not cute word, and also sad, as I realized that I did need to start cleaning up my vocabulary. Sometimes the Holy Spirit’s conviction comes through other people, including children.
I repeat that story often, it gets laughs but is also a signpost on my journey in my faith. Personally, I think that retelling it is similar to the wonderful story Rick tells about planning a bank robbery with murder in mind when God convicted him. Is thinking about robbing and killing wrong? Absolutely, but without knowing that, you wouldn’t know Rick’s story.
I think that is why there are a lot of messy stories in the Bible, they tell the whole story, offensive or not. So if that is the kind of story Lamott is telling, then there may be place for what she said.
Deborah,
Way to cut through the clutter and make a great application.
Thanks Neil.
And I fixed the link for my site.
No, Neil, you are supposed to tell Deborah what you told me. “Crap” is a dirty word and is never funny, especially from a 2 year old.
*sigh*
Deborah, thank you for that story. I think you are exactly right.
Neil, I’m glad you could hear it from at least someone and get the point. Apparently you have a problem hearing anything from me.
Chad,
She told a different story.
Neil
Neil, as far as I’m concerned, it was the same story. As the story was told above, Lamott came to the same conclusion I did about needing to make some changes. Holy living is a journey.
Chad, while I may agree that there is a place for swearing, and that the story is funny, there is something different that I can’t quite put my finger on, perhaps glee over the language, perhaps just a hint of enjoying the shock value, that makes how you told it a little different than how I did.
It may be a very fine line between you both and neither of you seems to see it.
Kyle in WI,
Did you get the memo from Deborah?
She gets it. Can you follow her logic?
Deborah,
Absolutely wonderful. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
jerry
Deborah,
The differences in your story are the inclusion of – “and also sad…” and “…I realized that I did need to start cleaning up my vocabulary. Sometimes the Holy Spirit’s conviction comes through other people, including children.”
Kids lie.
Kids lie all the time.
Nevermind guys. I see we can not discuss anything is this site. I used to comment all the time a year ago and enjoyed it very much until attitudes such as these came in. Not commenting on cussing, commenting on people with an attutudie as yours is Jerry.
Also just a FYI, the memo thing, red stapler and “jump to conclusion mat” was all a reference to Office Space. I was just trying to lighten things up a bit, becasue you some of you guys take yourselves way to seriously.
Grace and peace to all
Kyle,
What are you talking about? Are you seriously suggesting that it is ‘we’ who won’t carry on conversation? Did you get the memo that we are always open to conversation until you say stupid things like:
Seriously Kyle. It’s time to go to the grow-up mat.
jerry
Neil,
my point about “culturally determined” is that it’s very hard to get too, well, hard about something as flexible and contingent as “language”.
I don’t mean to open up the “language debate” again.
My point is that social niceties aren’t necessarily “moral” or speak of “spiritual fruit”….in reality they often speak more of social class stratification–as ways of distinguishing groups…
People may have personal convictions about particular words, I respect they see things as taboo. But I’m not bound to share their taboos. And when I refrain from such language when in their company, it is not because the taboo is inherently correct, moral or right…it’s about the simple fact that deference when with them is the more loving thing to do.
peace.
p.s. That’s why I commented about making such a taboo somehow a “spiritual fruit”.
#99
Yes but didn’t Jesus also say that out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks, indeed, that he would judge every casual word that we utter?
I know…this includes lies, slander….which you all are very quick to accuse the ODM’s of, and, in doing so, do the same yourselves VERY frequently.
Look, go ahead and justify your potty mouth, go ahead and justify supporting movies and entertainment and pastors and authors which use vile language. We will all give an account to God one day. I will prefer His Word, which uses language at time to describe things which are vile and dirty in context, not casually- such as describing our good works a filthy rags (dirty menstrual cloths) in his sight. I do not need to go outside His word for my guidance and my comfort and my direction.
Jerry, it seems you are getting more snarky lately. Is something bothering you? Perhaps you also should find comfort in his word and expression of frustration in your prayers.
Iggy, it is so nice to have you back. May God bless you richly.
Jerry,
How is that comment stupid(logical fallacy)? I complete understand how that stops the converstaion(sarcaism). So people do believe that. OSAS, DTS, ect..If question are not allowed how do conversation take place?
Right back at ya’, bud…
It’s hard for me to think of something more vile than supporting sites whose sole purpose is to attack pastors and other Christians.
We will give account, and I suspect Jesus will be a bit more merciful about questionable entertainment choices than he will be about actively attacking His bride.
Kyle,
I have no idea what you are talking about.
John,
Yes, you are bothering me. How’s that?
jerry
Jerry, we may be open to conversation, but the sarcasm, snarkiness, and personal insults in so many of the comments(i.e., calling a person’s comment/argument/position stupid instead of just addressing the preceived stupidity put forth) are really conversation killers.
It really does come across like, “You’re not worth the investment to gently and patiently correct, so I’ll just tear into you so you’ll just go away.”
Jerry,
You said “What are you talking about? Are you seriously suggesting that it is ‘we’ who won’t carry on conversation? Did you get the memo that we are always open to conversation until you say stupid things like:
Do you deny that those who God justified He will sanctify by the grace of God through faith in Christ?”
How is my comment stupid? People do deny this, how are we supposed to talk if we do not understand each other’s poistion.
How many time have you called me stupid, dense ect.. These kind of argument are mainly used in school not with theogolical talks. I still have no clue why you insist on calling people names. It seems a lot of the time on blog people talk past each other and miss each other;s points. Please be charitable with me and refrain from persnonally attacking me.
I said it was stupid because it had nothing to do with this conversation. It was an underhanded comment by you in order to insinuate that someone (I think iggy) is not in line with your theological objectives. It contributed nothing because it was not even rhetorical. It was only meant to cast aspersion on the person whose beliefs you were questioning.
I have neither accused you of being stupid (I said your comment was) nor have I called you dense (I asked if you were, and you didn’t answer). I did tell you to grow up and stop playing the role of martyr. You are not one.
Oh, I did ask how the reading skills were doing, but I hardly think that’s an insult. Just a question.
Sandman,
What?
Can you please expand on that, Jerry? (I don’t want to respond with “What what.”
So OSAS or DTS are not serious theogolical postion. The doctrine of a carnal christian? My question was serious and not meant to cast a shadow. Trying to figure out the intent of a comment on a blog is hard. The comment was not meant to be mean, but was a real question. Sorry. I will refrain from commenting on your blog as it is too diffcult.
Well, I’m not really sure if you are criticizing me for thinking Kyle’s comments and replies in this thread are stupid, if you are being sarcastic, or well, what. Then again, maybe I don’t want to know. I mean, to be sure, I haven’t really ‘tore into’ anyone. I seriously don’t understand half of what Kyle has written. He keeps accusing me of making logical errors and he’s the one who won’t explain what is illogical about them. Whatever.
Also I was not playing the martyr. I was just showing that your arguement’s and comments are illgoical(imagine I have pointy ears). That is why I kept saying what logical fallacy is this?
Live long and prosper!
Last comment.
Good bye.
What?
Once saved always save(OASA). dallas theogoical seminary(DTS). Carnal chrstians. People do deny that God sanctify those who he justifies. That is why I asked the question.
Kyle,
I’m being serious. I really don’t know what those two things have to do with the post. I’m trying hard to understand what you are talking about, I’m being patient like Sandman suggested. I just need some clarity because I don’t know what either of those things has to do with this post.
Thank you.
jerry
It had nothing to do with the OP. It was about the comments. Just discussing comments not the OP. Your Op is fine. Also as I have stated I have no clue who the author is and never read anything by the author therefore was never commenting on the author or OP. Just commenting on the comments. My mistake. I was asking Iggy in 61 what his postion on santification was. Then we started arguing pretty much about nothing from then on and missing each other’s points.
1. My comments have nothing to do with the OP.
2. My comments have nothing to do with the author in the OP.
3. I give up!
110: Okay, now I get it.
No, it’s more a general comment to all of us at large, not a criticism against you per se. Because you mentioned it (we welcome conversation) in #98, it made me think of a number of comment threads here that turned into nothing more than a meaningful exchange of unpleasantries.
I see some of that in this thread, and it’s not conducive to having a conversation, but it is a great way to start and prolong feuds and grudges.
114: And yes, Jerry, you are exercising patience. It would help if Kyle would take the time to (no offense intended) organize and articulate his thoughts better instead of rashly popping something off his keyboard without first seeking to be understood (the number of typos is an indicator that you may not be checking to make sure what you’re typing is going to be received the way you intend).
Kyle,
In all fairness, brother, your comments were rather confusing.
And to jump into a comment thread, trying to bring levity to it by quoting from a movie was kind of odd.
You have not commented on this site for awhile, that I’m aware.
So when some of us banter and joke back and forth, there is usually some history behind it. So it is recognized as such.
Unfortunately, your comments came into the middle of a conversation that was serious, and you tried to joke around. You used acronyms some of us did not recognize. And you kept repeating that “logical fallacy” question, which I still have no idea what you were actually asking.
Could Jerry have been more patient with you? Yes. Could you have explained yourself better when he expressed he did not understand your comments? Yes.
Don’t go away from this thread or this site embittered by this one exchange. Keep asking questions. Just try to be patient with us when we don’t understand you, just as you expect us to be patient with you, brother.
Shalom
OK.
Thanks for clarifying
Yes you are correct Sandman. I may not be a clear communicator and am an awful speller. Sorry guys my bad. I will try to slow down and read my comments several times before I post.
Comment 71 is where everything started to break down, that is when the ad hominem attacks started. This is what I was referring to with my logical fallacy comments. Although the ad hom was not intense or prolonged it is still not a logical way to communicate ideas and most assuredly was not seasoned with grace.
So this means for 30 posts we have been arguing pretty much about nothing. It could easily be called Seinfeld comments in that they where comments about nothing.
For future reference I am never trying to trap somebody with my comments and question. All my questions, except for that memo question, are serious questions. Intent of the commentator on a blog is always difficult to interpret. That is why it was odd the very first thing that Jerry asked me was “Are you dense?”
Hope to have more meaningfully dialogues with you guys in the future. Keep CRN and SoL honest guys and always remember to remove the log from your own eye before you remove the speck from your neighbors.(This applies to everyone that calls themselves a Christian and I am not applying this to anyone in this thread directly except for myself.)
Kyle
SDG
nc,
RE 99 and 100: makes sense… bringing the whole spiritual fruit into it is a bit of a stretch on the one hand… thanks for the clarification.
Hmmm… addressing lies, slander, inaccuracy, erroneous statements, nastiness, venom, and delight is other’s failing is tantamount to lies, slander, inaccuracy, erroneous statements, nastiness, venom, and delight in other’s failings.
Wait! What?
Show me a lie told about an ODM.
Show me a venomous comment that was not challenged.
Show me our delight in the sins of others.
Show me an erroneous statement that was not challenged and/or correct.
Show me a brother/sister judges to be outside of Christ based on external stylistic preferences.
Show me where we do the same.
PB,
it’s not about justifying my actions or anyone elses…it’s about you or others like you justifying your elevation of social niceties and personal preferences to moral absolute.
And you guys say you value The Word more than anyone else…
um… yeah.
As much as I have argued that vulgarity and profanity are more than simple social niceties, that they are spiritual issues… I wonder which the Lord finds more offensive – a potty-mought or the constant venom spewed from the keyboards of ODM’s against those bought by the precious blood.
Another quote from Anne Lamott:
I do not understand why killing the baby is an acceptable solution to not wanting it. The use of the word “trapped” is particularly inappropriate.
Yeah, PB. She must not be a Christian. Well done.
#127
I never said or insinuated that Chad, but, out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks….and by their fruits we will know them. And since she claims to be a Christian, we get to make judgment.
Talk about twisting Scripture to justify yourself.
Who would want to become a Christian if they know people like yourself can’t wait to get their hands on them. We get to make judgment – good grief.
Would you care to revise your statement, or, since you claim to be a Christian, would you care to be judged on your behavior/attitude toward divorced women?
(This is usually the point where PB says something like “mercy for me, judgement for you.”)
Or this is the point where 1) PB is no longer available for comment or 2) he says some BS like “Hey, I believe in grace. It’s all about grace. I’m the worst of sinners saved by grace. All my works are filthy rags… Blah blah blah…”
You know, stuff that no one believes he believes for a second.
Or, if he believes it in his heart, he has an odd way of letting it show forth in his life.
More is caught than taught…
Chad, I know that you do not like the scripture, or Paul, but here is what he says….
So…there is my comment.
And PB, I know you hate context, so humor me for a moment.
What is the one very important thing that is assumed in the above instructions?
And actually, I love that passage as well as every word Paul wrote down. I’m preaching all summer through the book of Ephesians. Wonderful, powerful stuff. ALL of it.
133: PB, church discipline is one thing, but you seem to be setting up your own not-so-great white throne.
Case in point, you apply I Cor. 5:9-13 as a reason for going after Lamott.
But, to be consistent, and intellectually honest, you’d go after Ingrid for her comments for the same reason.
But wait! You say you refrain because Ingrid isn’t a member of your church.
But then again, neither is Lamott.
Maybe about her actions if she is blatantly sinning and she’s destroying the Bride. But not about her. Anne Lamott is doing none of this. And besides, all our judgments would be wrong anyhow.
Tacking onto Jerry’s comment, we need to make sure we tend to the plank in our own eye before seeing to the speck in a neighbor’s.
And Paul says in Galatians how we should go about restoring someone. We need to take care ourselves not to get uppity and start lording it over that person.