we eat…we feast and we declare. in the face of a world who stands on the back of a beast with a pristute on his arm, we stand. we stand with the wounded king who triumphs. the prostitute is drunk on blood and our king shares his own. he gives. she takes.

yes. yes robert. stand.

-ryan

i haven’t read elton john’s comments. perhaps i don’t need to smell the aroma of his argument. i agree with you.

you know, william t. cavanaugh notes that the defention of religion is a fabricated idea in and of itself. it is a weapon. it is a term defined by the “modern state” in efforts to particularize ideas, isolate people, and destroy social bodies that might have a joint agenda. his argument goes: in the post-reformational period, poweful people began to expand territories and claim dominion in places with mixed religious groups. as a result these changes in geography stimulated warfare. this has been popularly dubbed the wars of religion. this is a mosnomer. instead, cavanaugh argues that the development of “statehood” created confusion in loyalty. those who had seen the ecclesiastic body as the highest governing authority now dealt with new lines on the map. as a result the state declared itself the “big brother” that would prevent opposing doctrinal groups from killing one another. they (the state) told this story and are still telling it. they claimed that this private affair, “religion”, was not to be in the hands of the ruling authorities but was private. prior to this it couldn’t be imagined that faith was so compartmentalized. faith diminshed and the state’s salvation encroached on the land in was forced out of. every time we hear someone condemn religion and its inherent violelnce we realize that the state’s lies have rooted themselves. the sates saves. that’s their story. for they wish everyone under their jurisdiction to believe that they are the only ones wise and capable enough to wield violence…of course for ouw “own good”.

thus the irony. religion for elton john is hateful while it is the state in which he lives that wields the largest sword. terms (religion, unity, plurality, etc.) are weapons used to condemn social groupings (i.e. churches) so that they can validate their need for other weapons (i.e. guns, prison, and economic sanction).

mr. John is merely a pawn spouting the beliefs of his big brother. he cannot see for he has no eyes to see says Isaiah. (he does wear dark glasses)

-ryan

speaking of communion.

the eucharist, that term in and of itself, is a foreign ambiguous expereince for most people. blogs don’t offer enough space to delve into the historical causes for such a contemporary ignorance. still, i guess it needs being said that we are a people who don’t understand MEANING when it comes to church matters. don’t you find it strange that in every OTHER element of the american experience that we can see behind the symbols of an event and realize the meaning present.

what i mean is: if you were to ask someone what they thought of a gift they got for christmas then most people would be able to describe the giver, and the contextual significance of the gift. they might even follow up (if they are questioned to do so) by adding what role this gift can play in the rest of their life. really, thats the reason they wanted it. they felt like the gift (whatever it might be) will help them throughout their life’s journey. when we eat the FEAST however, no one seems to be concerned with the role it plays for the corporate body. for most today, it is merely a time to reflect and resolve whatever immoral deeds one participated in the night before. then we proceed to relish in the goodness of a clean slate (so miy guilt won’t continue the insomia) provided by a bland cracker and some juice. then the cups are discared and we survive the next two months without it.

well, tell them this. tell them the truth. this meal, this body, is our primary act of political/social/moral/etc.. alegiance to a king. it is an act that is not solitary…for neither is the “pledge of allegiance” or our social security cards. each week at football games we participate in collective liturgies and freely submit our personal dignity by chanting “DEFENSE” (with angry eyes and salivating mouths). we are fashioned by the athletic chant itself and become “fans” in that moment. the next day at church we fail to see that when we eat the meal, we sacrifice our lives and say to our King, “may we too bleed for you and in this taking we claim our allegiance. we glory in the perefecting of your bride.” we most certinaly fail to see that this practice has anything to do with how much we align ourselves with capitalistic, exploitative industry! Ne’r will we preach that eating this means that one cannot serve two masters at once! imagine how upset some people might be, may we neever disrupt the masses…

the meal is so dynamic and has vast implications. it is not merely implications that can be explained by prose but they are acted out implications. when we eat the meal, we eat with the world. no global effort to homogenize people can ever…EVER sustain a universal body the way this measley old juice and crackers can.

wake up church. this is our story. this is our life.