Bush’s Legacy–How ’bout some Grace?

Now that all the fuss surrounding the presidential election has died down, I’m actually surprised that I haven’t heard much talk about President Bush and the legacy that he is leaving behind. With his low approval ratings, maybe his antagonists are simply relieved to have relief from him in sight. Maybe it’s “out-of-sight-out-of-mind.” Maybe his supporters are sad to see him go so, “let’s just not talk about it.” Who knows…but whatever the case, it will be interesting to see what kind of legacy he will leave behind.

Just after the election, in an article by The Onion, a faux news source, the author pokes a little fun at President Bush while presenting a viewpoint that would seem commonplace in more recent months. I must admit, it is a bit comical.

“In a press conference held this morning on the White House lawn, President Bush formally asked the assembled press corps and members of his own administration if, in light of today’s election, he could stop being the president now. “So it’s over, right? Can I stop being president now?” Bush said after striding to the podium in a Texas Rangers cap and flannel shirt, carrying a fully packed suitcase. “Let’s just say I’m done as of now. Presidency over.” When informed by Washington Post reporter David Broder that his presidency would continue through early January, Bush stared at him quizzically, sighed, and shuffled silently back into the White House.”

On the other side of the spectrum, Jeffrey Scott Shapiro believes that our nation’s treatment of President Bush is “disgraceful.” He believes that a large part of the President’s low approval rating has come from his efforts to work with both Republicans and Democrats. Neither party is satisfied and Shapiro writes that “no matter what Mr. Bush does, he is blamed for everything. He remains despised by the left while continuously disappointing the right.” He goes on to compare President Bush with President Truman, who had an approval rating of 22% as he left office. Yet, despite this low rating, Truman has become one of the more popular presidents and many of his decisions have been shown in a better light after his office.

It is hard to say what we will think of President Bush’s presidency in ten years. It is hard to debate that he hasn’t faced an extremely difficult time in office. Many of the problems in our nation have been brewing for decades and the pot has just begun to boil over in Bush’s term. That is hard to avoid. But, a better question does remain. How has President Bush handled these difficult circumstances? Could he have done better?

My personal take is that, of course he could have done better. But, I am not going to fault him for making a decision that went bad. We can all look back and see bad choices that we have made. That’s called being human. But, I will commend President Bush for being decisive in awfully complicated situations. I know that I could have done no better and being in his shoes is one of the last places I would want to be. I think that we are too critical of our leadership and we must remember that they are human, just like us. They need grace, just as much as us. Can we show that to President Bush? Can we support him as a fellow human being and not critique the crap out of him just because of his position?

The Bailouts

All week there’s been so much chatter about the auto industry and the big question: to bail out or not to bail out?

One of the things I hope this whole debate teaches Americans is that the government is always involved in shaping the business world in some way or another–from billion dollar bail-outs and trade policy on the federal level to securing cheap land and tax breaks for newcomer firms at the state level.  We often think that it’s just the market at work, but there’s more than that–even here in the relatively conservative welfare state that is the U.S., governments have tried to help the economy grow by giving benefits to certain companies for years.

After this realization, I want to encourage Christians in particular to consider the merits not of this government aid in and of itself, but rather the morality of the decision-making process behind such aid.  Many of these decisions are not being made by the federal government but by state and local governments competing for businesses to create jobs in their areas.  Most of us have probably heard of a car manufacturer or other multi-national corporation considering opening a plant in our state–and the ends to which a neighboring state might go to in order to secure the plant for itself.  Since these are often more localized deals, we could likely actually have a significant influence in these decisions if we wanted to and if we were informed.

Typically, I think job creation and general economic growth is the bottom line for most states and cities.  But as Christians, we must consider more than that.  Does this company pay a living wage?  Does it respect the environment?  Is it proactive about trying to help women and minorities climb the corporate ladder?  Does if have a history of labor violations?  What other companies does it do business with and what are their standards?  What kind of products or services does it provide and what is their impact on the U.S. and other socities and cultures?

When it comes to a multi-billion-dollar bailout package, it can be easy to think the disagreement is only about how involved the government should be or how much money the auto industry should receive or whether it’s possible to save the U.S. auto makers to begin with.

But this only happens once in a while.  We’re hopefully not going to be bailing people out for the next hundred years (though the economy is not so hot…).  What we will continue to do is say, “Hey, 3M, you really want to start something over here in our state!”  “Hey, Toyota, we’ll give you this land at half price!”  “If you don’t outsource these jobs to India, you don’t have to pay taxes for five years!”  And when that happens, let’s be sure we who care about building God’s kingdom have been involved in the process, helping to put in the right stipulations (“Well, you can have this land if you only make cars that get at least 40 mpg…”)–or by giving this aid to the companies that are trying to take business in a countercultural direction to begin with, valuing people and our planet, as well as profit.

Individuality fosters American Innocence?

When looking at the myth of “American Innocence” there are points when I find it hard to see my countries faults especially in certain wars. World War II is one that I feel many Americans might see it hard to not find innocence. We were trying to stay out of the war, but Japan bombed us at Pearl Harbor. However, America was making a lot of money selling arms and supplies to the allies and America were the ones that ended the war by dropping two atomic bombs on Japan – a symbol of you hit us and we hit back harder – and because of those bombs, war will never be the same again. America was not innocent in WWII.

However, this myth is given strength with 9/11 because of how difficult it is to say that America were anything but victims on that day. It is hard to view that event as a reaction to many events that lead up to it. When it happened and for months after America cried out “woe is me” and wondered “how did this happen?” This is one of the best examples of American Innocence and also a tough one to break the myth. It is hard for me to say that the people in those buildings were not at fault for the attack because they worked in the building. For me to do that I feel that I would be betraying my own thoughts. Yet, it is important note that the actions on 9/11 were fostered by American policies in the Middle East and the lack of reaching out their hands to help those who would become the extremists. Demonizing the other before was what helped to foster the actions of 9/11 and because of those actions demonizing them as the other became the common thought after that day.
I can understand that America needed to reach out to those in need around the world and foster hope for a better tomorrow instead of demonizing them as radicals or terrorists. It is harder to say that to a family that has lost a child or parent on that day. I feel that my struggle might be the key to understanding how easy it is for Americans to shout WHY whenever someone goes against us. American individuality might be the key.

American individuality fosters the sense that my neighbor next door is not accountable for me and I am not accountable for them. Whatever someone might do is not of concern for me unless it is against my own personal rights. This attitude takes people in America away from a collectivistic view – which says we are all in this together – and more to an individualistic view of our nation. This view fosters scapegoats and a lack of responsibility for all the people of America. Its Bush or Bush’s administration that is the cause or it’s the Democrats or Republicans that caused this or that. The idea of scapegoats is key to individualistic view because it isn’t my fault it’s theirs or “I am innocent they are guilty.”
This idea of individualism fosters our innocence as a nation and causes our nation to feel that we can do no wrong and if we do wrong it is someone else’s fault. This thought process is not beneficial for America especially when it has done wrong. To be humble and to accept blame for wrongs are key ingredients for Christianity and are not bad ideas for any country to take. Yet, even Christianity has problems following this idea. I hope that in the future Christians in America will start to live this way and try to strive to not demonize the other but to love them and not scapegoat but acknowledge their faults so that healing might come. When this starts to happen maybe our nation can follow and the healing might start to happen.

However, this myth is given strength with 9/11 because of how difficult it is to say that America were anything but victims on that day. It is hard to view that event as a reaction to many events that lead up to it. When it happened and for months after America cried out “woe is me” and wondered “how did this happen?” This is one of the best examples of American Innocence and also a tough one to break the myth. It is hard for me to say that the people in those buildings were not at fault for the attack because they worked in the building. For me to do that I feel that I would be betraying my own thoughts. Yet, it is important note that the actions on 9/11 were fostered by American policies in the Middle East and the lack of reaching out their hands to help those who would become the extremists. Demonizing the other before was what helped to foster the actions of 9/11 and because of those actions demonizing them as the other became the common thought after that day.

I can understand that America needed to reach out to those in need around the world and foster hope for a better tomorrow instead of demonizing them as radicals or terrorists. It is harder to say that to a family that has lost a child or parent on that day. I feel that my struggle might be the key to understanding how easy it is for Americans to shout WHY whenever someone goes against us. American individuality might be the key.
American individuality fosters the sense that my neighbor next door is not accountable for me and I am not accountable for them. Whatever someone might do is not of concern for me unless it is against my own personal rights. This attitude takes people in America away from a collectivistic view – which says we are all in this together – and more to an individualistic view of our nation. This view fosters scapegoats and a lack of responsibility for all the people of America. Its Bush or Bush’s administration that is the cause or it’s the Democrats or Republicans that caused this or that. The idea of scapegoats is key to individualistic view because it isn’t my fault it’s theirs or “I am innocent they are guilty.”

This idea of individualism fosters our innocence as a nation and causes our nation to feel that we can do no wrong and if we do wrong it is someone else’s fault. This thought process is not beneficial for America especially when it has done wrong. To be humble and to accept blame for wrongs are key ingredients for Christianity and are not bad ideas for any country to take. Yet, even Christianity has problems following this idea. I hope that in the future Christians in America will start to live this way and try to strive to not demonize the other but to love them and not scapegoat but acknowledge their faults so that healing might come. When this starts to happen maybe our nation can follow and the healing might start to happen.

It’s not my fault

We recently talked about how one of the most prevalent myths in our American culture is the idea of our country’s innocence. All throughout the 20th century there has been this transcending idea of America as the innocent, the righteous, the strength for the weak and defender of the suffering.

When this is the view of America, its citizens tend to use the word “we” a lot. We went in and saved the day during WW1, we stopped Hitler and Nazi Germany during WW2, we went and helped deliver Iraqis out of oppression after 9/11. When the things that America does or is doing are deemed good, righteous, and salvific, its citizens have no problem associating themselves with this type of work even if they themselves have had nothing to do with these “righteous” actions whatsoever.

When the tides of America are down, however–when we talk about American consumerism, materialism, corruption, manipulation and oppression of workers or countries, sweatshops, etc.–the first person plural almost inevitably becomes a third person plural: not we. Them.

They are the ones who are doing this. Those corporations have bad business practices. The government made some bad decisions. They shouldn’t have done this or that. They were the ones who were corrupt, etc. The average American citizen tends to stop associating themselves with America when light is shed on the negative aspects of our society, or they find ways to detach themselves from the offending party.

I feel like we as American Christians do the same thing. We tend to have an innocence about us. We tend to neglect our responsibility to ensure that our society–or at least the aspect of society in which we are involved–is promoting goodness. Does any individual take responsibility for the fact that clothes we buy for $75.00 were made in a different country for $.12? Does anyone individually accept their personal neglegence in allowing thousands and thousands of humans to be trafficked into our country as slaves (labor or sexual) every year?

Where does it stop? We take credit for things that have nothing to do with us when America does something good–yet when there are negative aspects of this society that we as individuals actually have contributed to, we refuse to stand up for it. We refuse to change, refuse to speak out, refuse to help. We blame it on someone else and throw the burden of fixing it on to someone else too. Even when there are aspects of this society that are inherently against what Christ stood for (and, thus, what we as Christians should stand for), we still play the innocence card. We still refuse to accept responsibility, or to take on any in order to help change society.

I think I’m especially focused on this topic during the Christmas season. I have family members who say that they aren’t materialistic, that they don’t give in to the consumerism of Christmas, and that they remember its true meaning, and yet they are the ones who were up at 4:00 a.m. on black Friday going shopping for the perfect gifts. They are the ones asking for the latest and greatest form of cell phones, shaving kits, cars, nintendo game systems, and clothing items on their Christmas list.

Perhaps we have lost the true meaning of Christmas. Perhaps we are so clouded by materialism and consumerism that we don’t realize how lost we’ve become. Well, either way, it’s not our fault. It’s theirs.

Consumerism the “reason for the season”?

American culture is an interesting subject to look at because it is constantly changing. Consumerism is one aspect in American culture that seems to emerge stronger throughout the years. Over the past thirty years, due to the rise of our economy during that time, consumerism has grown into an identity of what being American means. Our identity is in our things like: our car, our clothes, our electronics, and even the number of zeros on our paychecks. We as Americans allow these things to not only define us but to unite us with others that have the same identities: like country clubs, Warcraft communities, and even groups connected to certain fashion styles.
This idea of consumerism not only fosters these identities but it even changes the way Americans see our holidays. The holiday season (Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Years) is one area where this idea of consumerism is shown brightest. After a good day of eating, watching football, and spending time with your family; many people set their alarm clocks to 5 am or even 3 am so that they might be able to go get all the deals on “Black Friday” and some even skip Thanksgiving all together and just camp out so they can make sure they get that new XBOX or HDTV. If you do not like going shopping at stores then just wait till Cyber Monday rolls around in two days and you can just sit at your computer and find all the deals your heart desires. These two days are the pinnacle of consumerism during the holiday season.
Commercials during the holiday season spread the propaganda of consumerism as the “reason for the season”. This propaganda pushes for shopping binges during this season which builds on the desire to obtain all the things on your Christmas lists. This propaganda is not only driven by commercials, but also by advertisements in the newspaper and on the internet and through every store you might walk in on. Throughout the day it is very hard to not be affected by this propaganda. This propaganda infuses itself into the fabric of the holiday season so much that it is hard to try to break free of it.
It is interesting how some are trying to guide Americans away from this attitude of Christmas and back to the true “reason for the season.” Movies have tried to do it and some come very close; yet by the end of the movie they tell the audience that the meaning of the season is giving and being with friends and love ones (which is great but not the main reason for Christmas). However, some people in the Christian community try to show people that the meaning of Christmas is that God brought his son to earth so that all people may know him and be saved. One person trying to do that is Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback, with his new book The Purpose of Christmas. This book is trying to do such that, but I feel that he is not breaking Americans free from this consumerism driven season by just adding a new book to be consumed why people are shopping for other things on their list.

I feel the only way to try to bring Christmas back to its true meaning and to start breaking free from consumerisms hold on us we need to stop spending hours at malls, online shopping, and even making lists of what we want for Christmas. When people start breaking free from its hold then maybe a revolution of non-consumerism might emerge and I feel that Christians should be the avenue where this emergence starts. This could be the hardest thing any Christian or church might start to attempt to do because we everyone likes to open presents and to give presents, but at what cost?

Theologizing Superheroes (or, Revealing my Inner Geek)

Last night I satisfied for a brief moment my inner comic book fanboy and watched Superman: Doomsday, the cartoon adaptation of The Death and Return of Superman series.  [Some of you may be saying, “Superman died?!”  Others will be rolling your eyes that I even need to explain that, and there will undoubtedly be a few who don’t really care.]  I’ve always loved superheroes.  Maybe I’m mindlessly buying into what Robert Jewett in Mission and Menace calls “the American monomyth paradigm” (236-238); maybe I’m just indulging in childish flights of fancy.  Regardless, since I was a kid, I’ve loved Batman’s fun gadgets, Wolverine’s ridiculously cool adamantium claws, and Spider-Man’s webbing (and humor).  But Superman has always been my favorite superhero.

Every hero has angst.  It’s part of the comic book code: everyone struggles with something, whether it’s Spider-Man trying to figure out how to balance school and girls and fighting crime, or Wolverine wrestling with his shadowy past and trying to control his feral nature.  Superman’s angst is his otherness, his difference, his rootlessness; his struggle is to find his place in a world that is simultaneously his home and yet not.

Here then is the first parallel, one of the reasons I like Superman: because I identify with him.  Both for myself as a Third Culture Kid, and for myself as a Christian, whose citizenship is not in this world but in heaven (Phil. 3:20), this search and longing for home—to find people who really understand me and welcome me for who I am—is one of the struggles I face.  Where do I fit in this world?

But the second parallel is what struck me (again, but with more clarity) last night, when I watched Superman: Doomsday.  What makes Superman who he is?  It isn’t just his super-strength, or his laser sight, or his super-speed, or his ability to fly, or his invincibility.  It’s his values.  It’s the fact that, even though he’s got the capacity to have the world fall at his feet, even though he’s got the power to subjugate all people and do whatever he wants, he chooses to be a servant, even to the point of laying down his life to defeat evil.  Uh … obvious analogy, anyone?

Of course, the Superman mythology can be interpreted another way, as feeding into some of the American myths that Richard T. Hughes looks at in Myths America Lives By: of invulnerability, of always trying to do good, of American innocence.  But I think even this way of understanding the Superman/Christ/America association belies the way that we as Americans (and we as Christians) can sometimes tend to (consciously or unconsciously) claim for ourselves a messianic mantle.  (New discussion … go!)

Anyway … just wanted to bare my comic book-loving soul for y’all.

[Disclaimer: The movie isn’t all that amazing; but it is 75 minutes of fun.]

Compromise or Contextualization

It’s been a month since Election Day.  One of the things that struck me that day (and there were a few) was John McCain’s concession speech.  It was gracious, well-written and probably the best speech he gave in two years of campaigning.  It was also a far cry from his tone of the previous months, in which he questioned Barack Obama’s patriotism, his socialist policies, and his terrorist pals.

Throughout the primary and election campaigns, and this applies to Hillary Clinton as well, it was as if, for the two years of campaigning, a switch had been flipped that turned all presidential candidates into rivals, using whatever means necessary, throwing any accusation that might stick, to win the nomination.  Then, after the primary and the election campaigns were over, the switch was flipped back, and peace was restored.  And I suppose it has to be restored to some degree in order for people to work together.

But it seems a little disingenuous to me.  Or at least a little strange.  I’m inclined to think that the Senator McCain of the concession speech was the ‘real McCain.’  But I’d much rather not have to try to figure out who the ‘real’ politician is.  I’d like to think that there’s a different way of doing politics, one that doesn’t involve doing what’s expected by tradition or the spectacle-seeking media.

It leads me to wonder how Christians in politics ought to operate, notwithstanding the preliminary question of whether or not Christians should be in politics in the first place.  How far does Paul’s becoming “all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some” (1 Cor. 9) stretch in politics?  How far, if at all, do we ‘play the game’ in order to get things done, in order to enact policies that help the poor or expand education?  Where is the line between contextualization (which is what I’d describe Paul’s strategy as) and compromise, which would be selling out?

Speaking more generally, even in the church, there are those who seek to engage with culture by their way of doing church or by bringing Christ into the ‘secular’ work that they do, and it is not hard to find those who would accuse them of compromise, of not maintaining their Christian ideals.  There are those who fear the slippery slope, whatever the issue or practice may be, that we are falling further and further away from the way things are supposed to be (which often bears a striking resemblance to the way things used to be).

So I suppose it’s a question that’s ongoing at all levels of Christian faith and practice.  Anyone got any answers?  Coz that would be great.

Hope

The following is taken from American Mythos, by Robert Wuthnow:

[R]eflection goes beyond cynicism. It requires probing deeper into the narratives about individuality and success on which [the American] way of life is based. Reflection requires considering the story critically, thinking about what kind of message is being presented, and knowing what kind of society the message implies. That is the choice. (Wuthnow 2006: 234).

I know that I have been critical in many of my past posts: about the United States, about the Church, even about Christmas. However, what hits me hard about the above passage is that Wuthnow is crazy enough to propose that change can happen. Wuthnow has hope for this country and for its people. And I find that encouraging.

I am a huge proponent of narrative. I hold to the understanding that everything is narrative, and our understanding is simply the way in which we interpret the narratives as we encounter them. Hence, my personal love for hermeneutics. But, with that said, the under laying foundation to this understanding is that narratives form and shape us. They are the guiding paths that instruct us on how to live life. It appears to me that in many ways Wuthnow is not pleased to accept some of the major narratives of American culture, however, he also has a battle plan to dismantle them, in order to produce new narratives: reflection and critical engagement.

I like how he distances critical engagement from cynicism, for if we are cynical of American Culture then we as the Church lose our footing in which to engage it. However, by thoughtful reflection we can guide and deconstruct the narratives we find hurtful or erroneous, and interject Christ-like narratives into culture, with love and respect of the other. Not with distain or reputation of a cynic, but, with care as a co-inhabitant. Whether we like it our not, the narrative of American Culture was written during the watch, and many times right along side, the confessing church. The blames for the ills of culture then belong to the American Church as well.

The hope of Wuthnow, and I think the hope presented in the Bible, is that the narrative does not have to stay this way. The Kingdom of God is at hand, and the Kingdom narrative is breaking into the other. And I dare say this does not just happen with the incarnation of Jesus, but with creation. God, to use an Aquarian rip off, is the unwritten narrator, and it is to his story that we shall live.

There is hope for us, for the world and for its people… the narrative embodied in Jesus Christ.

The Rags to Riches American Myth

In the US, we love a good rags to riches story. This makes sense for a country that values, or worships, wealth. Rags to riches stories put in our minds early that wealth is to be valued and sought. The stories reinforce a mythology that wealth is obtainable for anyone in US, resulting in a population that doesn’t question our allegiance to money. When we’re all taught to value something and we’re all taught we’re all capable of gaining that something, we happily go along.

In American Mythos, Robert Wuthnow identifies this myth of the self-made, and Wuthnow gives a number of stories of Americans from humble beginnings who did amass fortunes. One account is of Linda Alvarado, a construction mogul in Denver. Alvarado grew up poor, worked construction jobs as a young adult, and then began her own company, which grew and grew and made her a very rich woman.

I’m glad Alvarado has had success, but I feel she’s the exception, not the rule. Here’s what’s wrong with the rags to riches myth: it doesn’t work. There are too many internal and external variables that go along with success and wealth.

Personality and Myers-Briggs
According to certified Myers-Briggs specialist Jo Saxton, the people with the most aptitude for pioneering new ventures are those who gather information intuitively (scored as an “N” in the second of the four indicators). This group of people, however, only comprise of 24-35% of the population. More specifically, the NT’s (iNtuition with a Thinking manner of decision making) are more apt to be entrepreneurial, and only 15-22% of us are like this. Finally, 4-7% of people are ENTP’s, who are known as the most entrepreneurial. It seems that some of us have a more natural ability to trail blaze, leaving most to be perfectly content not to.

Factors for Success: Outliers
In his new book Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell studies those things that make people success. In his approachable style, Gladwell finds that success is affected by external factors, which can include year of birth, devotion to practice, and upbringing. He finds that IQ may not be enough to ensure success, but being the right age when pioneers are needed can.

Clearly, rags to riches stories happen when the right factors align, and we never hear about failed attempt or squandered wealth (I did just touch that, MC Hammer). However, there are plenty of success stories in the US.

In the Adult ADD Bible, Driven to Distraction, Edward M. Hallowell and John J. Ratey point out that the US has higher numbers of adults with ADD than in Europe (ADD is a condition one is born with, and only 10% of children with ADD do not outgrow it and continue to have the condition as adults). The authors theorize as to why the US has this higher occurrence, and they wonder if adults with ADD were more likely to immigrate to the USA during the nation’s history. After all, adults with ADD tend to have a higher intelligence and take more risks

Perhaps our rags to riches myth comes from the fact that is takes someone more willing to be a pioneer, take a risk, and leave their homeland for the USA. Perhaps the USA has a higher percentage of pioneering types than other country because their genes were more concentrated in the populations immigrating to the US. Whatever the reason, the myth idolizes money and is therefore contrary to the message of Jesus.

The church then should find new ways of measuring success and instilling the values of the kingdom of God instead of the values of greed.

Christmas Tragedy, Christmas Travesty

All quarter long we’ve been talking about politics, Christianity, and American culture. We’ve also talked a lot about what it means to be a Christian living in America–definitely a multi-faceted conundrum.

Here are some of the questions I’ve started to think about as a result of our studies: How different would my Christianity look in another country/culture? How many aspects of my Christianity are actually aspects of AMERICAN Christianity, not derived from biblical studies or spirituality but simply from my country? More importantly, how does God feel about the “christianity” we here in America practice? Does he enjoy the fact that things like Christmas and Easter are national holidays, or is he disgusted at how warped these two commemorative celebrations have become?

The other day on BBC news, I read a story about a Wal-Mart worker who died on black friday. He was one of the people on the inside of the store, waiting for it’s doors to open early the Friday after Thanksgiving so that the 2,000 people waiting outside could come snag their gifts to celebrate “Christmas.” Well, as the stampede of shoppers rushed into the store, this worker got caught up among them and, exactly like a stampede or horses or cattle, was trampled to death. This guy wasn’t small, either. He was 6′5 and weighed 270 lbs.

Sounds unbelievable, right? I read that a few people tried to stop and help him, and although none of them died, they were all injured, one of which was a pregnant woman.

I’m really stunned to silence on this one. I can’t imagine that people would be so caught up in their own selfishness and greed that they would actually end up KILLING someone as a result. I am utterly, utterly disgusted. Not only does America’s obsession with materialism and consumerism, especially during Christmas, just piss me right off, but when we let that obsession get in the way of judgement, of courtesy, of compassion, and of LIFE, we obviously have a massive problem on our hands.

So, how DO we live as Christians in this American Culture? Yes, America celebrates Christmas, a Christian holiday. But does that holiday look any differently for Christians in America than it does for non-Christians in America? I’m not talking about including a nativity scene in your decorations or attending a Christmas even service at Church. I’m talking about the significance of the holiday as seen by where our thoughts and actions are. Even for Christians, our thoughts and actions aren’t on the fact that this is a celebration of our Savior’s birth. They’re on Christmas lists, shopper savings, and present wrapping.

I think it’s time we gave Christmas back to Christ.