Podcast

Make Saints is a podcast by Drew Downs.
Because (eternal) life is hard.

Back to Work
The challenge of going back to work is that “work” feels the same and we feel different. But we’re not alone.

Photo by Marten Bjork on Unsplash

Episode 37 of the Make Saints podcast: “Back to Work”

the episode script

Going back to work is a thing.

After a vacation. Or time away. Staying home with the kids. Or Covid. Perhaps after medical leave. Or bereavement.

All of these experiences offer such different emotions. But there is something they do have in common:

Setting foot in a space that values The Same and right now, you aren’t.

Sometimes, going back to work involves dealing with challenges. Like this.
1. How do you force yourself to do something you don’t want to do?
Maybe you liked the time. And I don’t mean in the way everyone prefers leisure, “so suck it up,” we say. I mean, something fundamental is triggered. And this thing you’ve been doing just isn’t it.

So we may find ourselves feeling like we must will ourselves back into it.

This may be a sign of burnout. And we can’t will ourselves out of burnout. It’s like willing ourselves out of trauma. We can’t. It’s not possible. It’s like using a hammer on a screw. It’s the wrong approach; the wrong tool for the job.

And trying to just power it almost always makes it worse.

This is a case in which therapy, counseling, spiritual direction, or simply more time is in order.
1. Do What You Love
We think that if we only pick things we want to do, then getting back at it will be fun. This is the theory behind the adage: “If you do work you love, you’ll never work a day in your life.” Or however it goes.

This is the lifehack approach to preemptively tricking yourself into making work easier by liking it first with the expectation that this will make it easier to come back to it. This has a maximizing-your-productivity vibe, doesn’t it?

There is support in the psychological research for using these sorts of tricks to get your mind to respond differently to certain stimuli. Of course, these are, fundamentally, tricks that reorient how we approach a thing. And because they are fundamentally based on how our brains work, they are more or less effective for everyone.
1. Only choose to do what you want to do
We can take ourselves in a totally different direction to achieve a similar goal. Instead of forcing ourselves to like something or tricking our brains into liking it, we can instead take control of how we relate work to our lives.

We can simply choose not to do things. To go in a different direction.

One More Thing

Now, I don’t know about you, but when people talk about work and the human challenge of returning to it, reading tips and tricks about getting back in the groove always feels like it should help.

Essentially, we’re trying to reach out and fix a problem by enlisting an author, podcaster, or youtuber. Someone who can give us something we can do on our own. The very definition of self-help.

But so often, it leaves us empty. Either it doesn’t actually help in any way. Or it comes in the form of a laundry list of new things to do when we’re already overwhelmed with doing stuff!

Think about it.

If our to-do list is too long, and we look for help, what do we always hear? “Here’s what to do so you can do all the things.” When we’re overwhelmed, by all of the things, doing actually adds to the problem. Our brains treat it like part of the problem.

Or it treats it like a replacement for the problem. Your brain says “Instead of doing these 18 things I don’t want to think about, I’ll think about this one thing instead!” Now our brain is thanking us for giving it a new distraction!

Unhealthy Balance

Underneath our whole approach to work, health, and satisfaction is an unhealthy vision of work itself.

Some people can regulate themselves well. They achieve what we frequently call work/life balance. And they seem satisfied all of the time.

But most of us fake it. Or we’re convinced we’re doing a good job of regulating when we’re really not.

As I described in the previous episode of the podcast about getting unstuck, for many of us, our brains seem to be hardwired to a default of an unhealthy vision of work. We power through even when all of the evidence points away from that. All the experts say cut that junk out! And we go, but this is what I’m supposed to do!

We’ve adopted a work-first mindset in our hearts and our heads are pretending we’ve got work and life equally balanced.

If we actually want the two to balance (like we say we do), then we can’t always put work first. And we can’t put work first 75% of the time, either. Balance has to actually balance.

Which likely means we have to approach work differently.

Better Work

This summer, I thought alot about my post-vacation life. Asking myself what it would be like to bring more of the restorative freedom vacation offers to the rest of the year.

I know this isn’t a new idea, and a big part of the passive income movement is just this exactly! But for those of us who work a regular schedule, we never actually think like this. We often think of work like a grind full of obligations.

So while we might ask ourselves if we’re in the right job or trying to figure out how to balance a stress-filled job with a stress-filled life, perhaps we’re asking ourselves the wrong questions.

Perhaps the problem isn’t us. That we need to get better about work.

With epidemic levels of burnout across many industries and fields, why would we insist that the individual is the problem? Like we need to find a better job while our jobs want to find better people.

Maybe we all need better work. Healthier work. And a life that is filled with more rest and joy.
Sep 16, 2022
Simple

Is the simplest explanation the right one? Usually. Except when the answer that seems simple actually isn’t.

Photo by Sohel Patel

Episode 36 of the Make Saints podcast: “Simple”

the episode script

A couple of weeks ago I received an email from someone who took issue with an article I wrote several years ago about that strange moment in the gospel of Luke when Jesus suddenly encourages his followers to go buy swords, only to find out that they brought a couple along.

It is a weird passage that feels totally out of place and would also be totally forgettable if I didn’t live in the United States where any excuse to defend guns becomes its own gospel. So it is pretty obvious from jump why this story is read in really different ways depending what you think of open carry.

What this person objected to, however, was not what I argued. They argued that my response sounded complicated. And Jesus is simple.

The Problem

If we take every word in the gospels as prescriptive of our behavior, then we’re stuck in a paradox. Jesus says to get rid of weapons everywhere else. But here, he says to go get them. So we either listen to Jesus in one place and reject the other or we attempt to make two conflicting prescriptions into a unitary meaning that isn’t present in the text at all.

The reasoning goes: Jesus is encouraging the disciples to buy weapons so that they might use weapons so therefore using weapons is what disciples do so therefore we should go buy guns in case we ever need to use them. This is doing a ton of extrapolating a prescription from the text. Yet none of that is actually in the text.

But what is in the text?

Jesus telling them to not be violent. Not defend themselves. Ditch weapons and possessions. To trust neighbors. All of his teachings argue that there is neither need for weapons nor goodness in owning them.

The text also tells us why they are to buy these weapons (while implying they shouldn’t have any): to be seen by the Romans as terrorists.

This “complex” view is more consistent. And quite simple.

I get where this person is coming from. I totally do. And I’m not dunking on them.

The reason I’m sharing this with you rather than a private email in response is that the point isn’t who is right. Or which idea is more simple.

This story helps get at an idea that we aren’t really conscious of.

The hidden cost of simplicity.

We probably find it easy to code this exchange as a difference in opinions. There are two ways to see this moment. Two sides and two positions. That’s a pretty simple narrative.

But it’s incomplete. By design.

These aren’t simply two positions. Though we may essentially reduce them to two positions. But to do so, we strip the very meaning we need in order to make a more honest assessment.

The emailer wanted a simple vision of Jesus that made Jesus’s words translate directly into their actions. But to view this story in that lens, he would need to ignore the rest of the gospel. And he would need to make up a lot of suppositions not in the gospel.

To achieve simplicity we’re willing to cheat.

The journalist Johnny Harris recently came under fire for a video that stretched the truth too much for the sake of a good story. He has since apologized.

This is the real challenge with our desire to receive something as simple. It leads to shortcuts and missed information.

The emailer was convinced that the solution had to be more simple than the one I offered. But I assure you it isn’t. AND my argument is pretty simple. No, Jesus doesn’t encourage you to buy guns for self-protection in Luke 22. He’s setting up a prophecy.

But to prove that, I needed to show my work. Which makes it seem complicated.

People shouldn’t lie. And don’t encourage us to.

Life is complicated. And we think we can simplify it like it’s math and we’re working with fractions and yet sometimes we’re stuck with like 41 over 143 and you’re like, there’s gotta be a way to reduce that further.

But shortcuts always come at a cost. And when we pressure our leaders to take shortcuts because we expect easy answers…none of us will find the truth.

Sep 2, 2022
The secret to getting unstuck
We all know what it feels like to hit a wall; to get stuck. What do we do when we feel like we can’t do anything?

Episode 35 of the Make Saints podcast: “The secret to getting unstuck”

the episode script

A couple of weeks ago, I hit a wall. Not literally, of course. My car’s fine. My head’s fine. Nothing’s broken. All walls are fine.

No, the metaphorical wall. That’s what I hit. (Of course, you knew that—but I have some really concrete people who follow me, so I wanted to make sure [see what I did there? Concrete/Wall—I’m so punny]).

Anyway. The wall. I hit it. And it was so unbelievably demoralizing. First week back to work. Flying high! Feeling good! Then WHAM! I was a puddle of ooze trying to stand at my standing desk. (Which is hard when you’re ooze. I could’ve brought the laptop down to the floor with me, but the oozey arms probably wouldn’t let me type anything.).

I was stuck.

Here’s what I did.

I should get this part out of the way fast.

I know you’ve read books, listened to podcasts, or watched youtubers give you the 7 tricks to getting unstuck. All of that stuff. So 1) this seems superfluous (which, ironically, is a superfluous word that means: unnecessary) and 2) I’m just adding to the noise.

And, in that sense, I am.

But I think there is real value in naming two responses to those two criticisms: 1) hearing about someone’s personal experience is a different thing than hearing some generic tips and tricks. Our brains process this stuff differently. And 2) my story can be used to explain the why behind the tricks in a way that may connect with you.

So, here we go.

Step 1: The Moment

I was stuck. Really stuck. Puddle on the floor. Useless to the world.

At this point, I trust you know the feeling. You’ve experienced this at some point. So we test how we’re feeling.
1. Am I tired? Did I get enough sleep last night? Did I work out earlier? Have I gotten enough physical activity lately?
2. Am I hungry? Did I skip lunch? What has my diet even looked like lately? Too many carbs? Too little caffeine? (oooh caffeine…)
3. Are there any things causing stress? Am I in a stressful environment? Is something bothering me? Do I have deadlines?
After we go through the inventory and see if there is anything biological going on that can be remedied by, you know, sleeping, eating, or meditating, we can move on to step two.

Step 2: Back it Up

There was nothing wrong with me. I was back from vacation and feeling great. I’ve been sleeping well, eating well, and feeling a regular amount of stress. It was the end of the week, so…deadlines. But I don’t turn into a puddle every Thursday.

So I needed to see what I was actually doing that day.

And to tell you the truth, it was a really productive day. I was up by 6:45, did Morning Prayer, made breakfast for my son, dropped him off at school, went to Starbucks to write for several hours, updated the church website, wrote a few difficult emails, ran up to Staples to cross a to-do off the list, came home and made lunch, and read a few pages of a book while I ate.

Then when I pulled the computer out of my bag, went to my standing desk to work…it just all fell apart and I was a puddle, like that {snap}.

What happened?

Step 3: Stop looking for The Problem

Here I was, a puddle. On, probably the most productive day I’ve had in months. Maybe all year. And yet it was only 1:00. I had no reason to be a puddle. I couldn’t find it.

Now, I’ve read enough to know what happened, so my head kicked in and gave me the answer. Maybe yours did already. And here’s where self-help gurus actually do come in handy. They give you the concepts that will make sense when you’re in the moment. And I totally was.

And yet…I didn’t entirely trust it. I really needed to convince myself because the counter-programming is strong. So I had to say it out loud:

You need a break.

Six hours with no breaks. I was in a total flow all morning. I wasn’t just getting stuff done, I was feeling good while doing it. I was in it.

And also, I broke up my actions with different tasks. Cooking, driving, writing by hand, typing on a laptop, browsing office supplies…

But did I ever stop?

No, I didn’t.

And the culprit that was most hidden from me was not the time we label as “work time”. It was all of it.

I have podcasts running constantly when I’m running around. So, from the time I dropped my son off at school, to Starbucks, then from Starbucks through Staples, and home, until I sat down for lunch, I was listening to podcasts.

Then I read during lunch.

And the whole time I was pushing myself. Asking myself What’s Next?

My brain was on for over six hours without pausing.

We Need Margin.

Our brains need downtime. They need to pause and rest. The brain is a muscle. So when we spend so much time in active thinking, we are quite literally working them out. Yeah, we can make our brains buff. But everyone knows gains require regular time off. You don’t lift for hours without resting between reps!

At any point during the morning, I could have taken time to just chill. And it probably wouldn’t have led to my being a puddle.

And if you’ll indulge me one second more, because I think this is valuable.

The problem isn’t flow. Experts in productivity have found it is quite the opposite: short breaks during flow states actually increase creativity by helping us make connections. As long as we don’t too severely interrupt our process with different brain work.

So taking a few minutes to search random junk on the internet can actually help our creativity, whereas being interrupted by colleagues wanting you to solve their problem can hinder it. But that’s a whole other thing. And beside the point.

When I was in the flow/productive state, I didn’t take breaks. In fact, I was doing the opposite. I could sense the need to take a break and kept going. I forced myself to work. To get more done.

I didn’t stop to celebrate victories or even acknowledge that I was just trying to power through task after task.

In essence, instead of maximizing my productivity, I burned through all of my energy.

Step 4: Unstucking Myself

The solution really is as obvious as it sounds: rest. I needed to take a mental break.

And I know this. It is what all of the productivity experts say.

But I had an old, broken soundtrack in my head that was looking at the clock and getting mad that I wasn’t still hammering away at 1 in the afternoon. I needed at least two more hours before I could allow myself to stop.

So let’s acknowledge what this means. I wasn’t listening to my body. Or experts in brain science or productivity. I wasn’t listening to professors or colleagues. Let’s face it: I wasn’t even listening to my own mind! Because I knew what was right.

Against all of that, who was I listening to? A made-up person representing a devil’s advocate. That’s the person I was trusting with my health. A figment of my imagination.

I went for a walk.

I stopped what I was doing, got changed, and went for a walk. Now, it wasn’t total silence. I went for a walk in my neighborhood with earbuds in while listening to music. I couldn’t have listened to a podcast if I wanted to!

And guess what? Maybe ten minutes into it, I started thinking.

I opened up my voice memos and started taking notes of what I was thinking about.

Mostly about vacation and work and all of that. But also this.

The Wall. Becoming a puddle. What we often diagnose as writer’s block. The fear. The exhaustion. Frustration incarnate.

I talked into my phone for about 15 minutes. And when I was done, I just kept walking. I walked the whole neighborhood. Then I came back and took a shower.

And I forgave myself.

I forgave myself for pushing my mind and for ignoring it

And in recognizing that I had already done a day’s work, I found it easier to simply go through the backlogged email, pet the cat snoozing on the couch next to me, and before I knew it, the kids were home from school.
Aug 26, 2022
The Paradox in the Force

It is striking that we adhere to this paradox. That good and evil are balanced AND that evil is always stronger than good.

Episode 33 of the Make Saints podcast: “The Paradox in the Force”

excerpt from the episode

Star Wars isn’t just a story. It’s a myth.

Myths have a deeper power in them. To explain. To reveal. To help us understand our world.

It is a myth about good and evil; freedom and empire; democracy and fascism. The kind of myth that always seems relevant. And prescient.

And at its core, is a magical, spiritual concept which can tell us a whole lot about how we see our world. Let’s talk about The Force…

Jul 15, 2022
5 Rules for Vacation

Some of us don’t do vacations very well. Or we feel guilty about taking them. Here are five ways to help change that.

Episode 32 of the Make Saints podcast: “5 Rules for Vacation”

the episode script

I have a hard time going on vacation. It isn’t that I don’t like to. Or want to. It’s just that I have a hard time pulling myself away.

See, I’m a workaholic. I over-invest myself into my work. I use it to define me.

Also, I’m the kind who worries about what will happen when I’m gone. And how much work will be waiting for me. So I’m worried about other people and planning for the mountains that await me. I’m optimistic and pessimistic at the same time.

Even though I know vacations are good for me, I let them become a source of anxiety. So I have to make myself do this. And the best way to make myself do this is to sketch out some ground rules for myself.

Here are my five current rules for vacation.

1. Take enough time

The science around vacation is pretty clear: we need more of it. At least those of us in the U.S. Way more.

And just as important: more time taken at the same time.

It takes about three days to begin to shut down the work brain. And about another three for that process to complete. That’s almost a week of vacation time for your brain to relax enough to actually be on vacation!

Then, toward the end of vacation, the work brain starts the slow process of booting back up, so about six days out, it starts to boot up.

So the stark reality is that long weekends aren’t vacation. A week isn’t vacation. Even two weeks only nets you about two days of true rest.

Our bodies and brains are so starved from rest, we don’t even know what vacation is anymore.

Of course, not everyone can take three or more weeks at one time, but if you can, do it.

2. Plan to intend

I’m not a big Planning Guy when it comes to vacation. I really want to shut off the brain and go with the flow. Minimize decisions. Though, of course, itineraries help; especially on destination vacations.

On the other hand, we need to keep ourselves committed to the purpose of vacation. As much as going with the flow can be super restful, the lack of order is messing things up, it’s not probably not the best trade-off.

But we don’t have to go all Type A on our vacation, either (unless that sparks your joy—then go for it).

These days, I’m finding the word intention helpful. Intentions connect your core self with your behavior. So intentions are the things you want to be doing. Whereas goals are demonstrable and achievable, intentions are vague and squishy. Which makes them perfect for vacation.

If I intend to get a walk in every day next week and get one in six out of seven days, I can feel good about being someone who walked during vacation! But if I set a goal to walk everyday, I would measure that as a failure: I missed a day.

Be intentional, and the things we value become far more likely to happen.

3. Lay in a hammock

This is my annual #1 intention. To spend time in a hammock at least once.

For me, the hammock is a symbol of true relaxation. It is time spent alone, outside, restfully reading, then dozing off, waking to the sun twinkling through the leaves overhead.

I set my intention to do it at least once (as opposed to, say, an hour every day) because I have a bunch of other things I know I’ll want to do. We need to go mini-golfing, swim, eat ice cream.

But in the midst of all my “have-to-dos”, I have one requirement that stands above all at least once: I rest.

That is my icon for vacation.

You may have a different icon. But find it. And make it happen. At least once.

4. Get in the water

I’m a big guy. Other guys have a six-pack. I have a nice, round one-pack. I also have never had an honest or healthy body image.

So obviously, the beach is not my thing.

Besides, it’s usually hot. And I’m a (bald) red-head, so really, I’m only allowed about 45 minutes of sun per day.

As a kid, I loved the beach. I grew up a block from Lake Huron. I spent the whole summer at the beach.

And when we go north on vacation, my kids spend every day at the beach. So I do too.

But now I get in the water.

Nobody cares. I might blind them with the sun reflecting off my pasty skin. But so what? Get in the water. Swim. Dive into waves. Play games.

Live it up with people you love.

The same applies to other activities. Dance, sing, laugh, try new things, play ridiculous games. Have fun.

5. Leave it like you found it

The old camping phrase may be the most important lesson any of us will learn in life. This usually means “clean up your junk.” You can be a slob in the camping site, but pick up all the trash before you leave. Make it pristine for the next person.

But I think we can expand the idea to the whole vacation experience.

For those of us who work in creative or knowledge fields in which we have a whole host of responsibilities that all kind of get put on hold when we go on vacation, there is a cruel disincentive to never take vacation. All of the work we do just so that we can go on vacation is compounded on all of the regular work. Then, when we return, there’s all that work that has piled up while we were gone.

It can make it seem like we didn’t actually get vacation. We gave the job an advance on our labor.

If we can adjust our mindset for our vacation, but more importantly everyone else’s to a “leave it like you found it” mindset, we’re setting an expectation of normalcy through our vacation.

When I leave, stuff will keep going. And when I get back, everything looks the same. I can leave it the way I found it. And I can find it the way I left it.

Other Rules

I’m sure there are lots of other rules for vacation. Rules that fit your personality or situation.

The main purpose of naming these rules is so that I can make more of my own vacation. To help me remember to take enough time, use intentions, and play in the water.

If you need me, though, chances are, I’ll be in the hammock.

Jul 8, 2022
What is religious freedom?

Why does religious freedom not look very…freedomy? Because it amounts to a one-sided conversation about what counts.

Episode 31 of the Make Saints podcast: “What is religious freedom?”

the episode script

I know you’re familiar with the phrases “religious liberty” and “religious freedom” but what do we actually mean by them? We get the ideas of liberty and freedom (well…sort of, at least we think we do).

And, for the most part, we think we know what religious means.

So why do we have such wildly different ideas about what all of this means?

I’ve discussed the trouble we have with understanding freedom in previous episodes. So maybe it’s time to talk about what we actually mean by religion.

—-

Religion

There are really two working definitions of religion that we all draw on. One is the more technical one used by organizations, governments, churches, academics, and pretty much anybody that wants to get this junk right. Religions are systems of belief and the organized people who practice them.

A religious tradition can be described by its common sets of beliefs, but religions themselves are embodied by the people. So a religion is established, embodied, and common among people.

The other working definition of religion is like…vibes. Not as in vibes as a form of religion. No, I mean, whatever someone’s vibes decides religion is. So, like, people (even Supreme Court justices) think a “sincerely held belief” counts as “religion”–but really, only in the court cases that they like. They don’t think a pot church represents a religious institution, for instance, but think a craft store does.

So on the one hand, we have a working definition most of us use and another some of us use to their advantage. So…guess what this means for freedom.

Religious Freedom

In recent years, the idea of religious freedom turned from something we all, more or less, agreed on to something few of us do.

Back in the 1980s, a wide variety of Christian denominations worked with groups from other religions to support the original Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). This came about over the concern in a particular court case against a Native American group and the use of the peace pipe. They saw the curtailing of religious and cultural practice of Native Americans as potentially harmful to all religious groups.

So they worked together to find a way to protect all religions from undue restrictions.

Thirty years later, Evangelical Christians sought to reframe that earlier conversation to support their vision of religious freedom; without the support of most other Christians, let alone anyone else.

The difference in the case

What was different in the second round of RFRA cases at the federal and state levels in the 2000s and 2010s was that the pursuit of Evangelical Christians was not religious freedom, but unlimited liberty for a certain religious tradition.

They specifically wanted to elevate the liberty of white evangelical protestants with conservative politics above the rights of others.

Even as many Roman Catholics have signed on to these pursuits, we must recognize that this isn’t the unfettered liberty of all religions or even all Christians. It is the elevation of certain Christians that agree with them.

The Court Cases

The many cases before the Supreme Court have shown this similar character.

In the Hobby Lobby case, the court suggested they were protecting the religious liberty of the employer to not provide healthcare to their employees. But they restricted the liberty of the employees seeking healthcare they could get anywhere else.

In several cases involving shop owners unwilling to sell to certain groups, the court sought to protect the religious liberty of the owner to discriminate. But they restricted the religious liberty of, say, a couple to live into their sacramental life together.

And in a recent example, the Supreme Court sought to protect the religious liberty of a high school football coach to publicly pray with his team after a game. But the religious liberty of the players, coaches, and families were not even respected in the Court’s decision. They were deemed irrelevant.

Freedom = liberty + equality

As I described in an earlier episode about freedom, the fundamental principle of freedom is that it only exists in concert with everything else. Like, your freedom is always dependent on the freedom of your neighbors. Always.

The equation goes like this: Freedom = liberty + equality.

The most famous description of freedom is attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes and amounts to the idea that your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. It’s a way of saying you have a ton of personal liberty to do so much stuff, but when that liberty starts running into other people’s liberty, then you’ve found the limits of your liberty.

What all of this talk of religious liberty and religious freedom is doing, is that it is trying to argue that the first amendment allows for no limits on anyone’s religious liberty. Which, OK, sounds great, until other people start to get hurt. But they’re saying No, no, no! That’s not enough! You can’t limit their religious liberty! Ever!

But, when people literally argued that their religious liberty was being restricted by Hobby Lobby or a football coach, they were like pppttthhhbbbbt! Nonsense. Doesn’t count.

The unfettered liberty of some isn’t the classic definition of freedom. Nor is it one that can be recognized by most people.

Because we can look at this stuff and see that this whole thing feels off.

Pretending freedom is maximal liberty

Of course we can see how they got there. And it really does seem like a conundrum.

We want religious freedom. We also want everyone to have it.

This is why we need to recognize the fundamental difference between maximal liberty and maximal freedom. We all have the most freedom when we all have as much liberty as possible. Every one of us.

This is why we’re getting tangled up in our understanding. Because maximal freedom requires that we balance our desire for maximum liberty with equality. So that our religious faith is protected from the pressure of football coaches and players, for instance.

Diminishing Voices

The Supreme Court has done a lot to mess up our sense of religious freedom, but they aren’t the only ones.

For many of us who consider ourselves religious: whether it be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, what have you: we are constantly having to navigate both of those working definitions of religion.

And the same applies to our religious traditions.

As a Christian, the media has constantly referred to these court cases as “wins” for Christianity.

And yet, each one has been at the expense of people just like me or people in my congregation. People whose sincerely held religious beliefs are being violated. As Christians. By other Christians.

This is clearly not a “win” for Christianity. It isn’t greater religious freedom. But guess who wins every time a journalist calls it that?

Jul 1, 2022
Too Simple
If you’ve ever been asked to simplify a complex idea, you know it’s incredibly hard. So why do we pretend it is simple?

Episode 30 of the Make Saints podcast: “Too Simple”

the episode script

Have you ever been told by someone that they don’t want to hear the whole story? They tell you to break it down to what’s most important. Then they say:

Explain it to me like I’m a 5 year-old.

Man, I hate that. Have these people never tried to explain complex ideas to kindergarteners?

They may as well ask us to design a load-bearing bridge across a chasm. No worries. I’ll wait.

They’re asking for a big thing to be made small — in an instant. Like, off the top of your head.

The thing about this isn’t just that one person is asking another for the impossible. It’s that they don’t even see why that is impossible.

—-

What we’re asking from simplicity

Many of us have a great deal of experience with the challenge of simplifying complexity. What the person who is asking us to describe it like we’re talking to a 5 year-old is trying to say is please make this complex thing more simple. Simplify it for me.

In other words, transform the concept and transport it from the realm of complexity to the realm of simplicity.

Don’t bring the complex idea into my simple world. Make the complex idea simple and then bring it to me.

We are quite literally telling each other to transform a thing, change it, so that we can understand it.

The Dark Side

It is also saying, I don’t want everything explained to me. I just want the gist. The Cliffs Notes or the top sheet.

This is different from simplicity. Summaries aren’t necessarily simple. They’re shorter, but a lot is left out.

If we want to understand a thing, we do need to wrestle with the whole thing. It’s a balancing act.

Simplifying stuff is hard.

Anyone who has ever learned a complex thing knows the challenge of trying to simplify it.

There’s even a well known saying among preachers that goes something like this:
- If you want me to preach five minutes, give me a week.
- If you want me to preach twenty-five minutes, give me a day.
- But if you want an hour, I can start right now.
Simple takes time. It is hard. Most of us can’t explain it to you like you’re a 5 year-old at the drop of a hat.

And the only people who can are experts and hucksters.

Why simplifying is hard

If you and I were asked to describe something a little complicated, like say, the Trinity, we’ve got a bunch of ways to go. But let’s settle on three (which is obviously totally appropriate).
1. Simplistic
2. Escapist
3. Mystery
The Simplistic approach cuts corners, knowing they aren’t supposed to, but whatever. They’ll use an analogy to tell people the Trinity is like water, even though that’s modalism. They are so eager to make it simple, that they cut out stuff they’re not allowed to just to make it make sense. You’re not getting a condensed version of the whole story. You’re actually getting a distorted story.

The Escapist approach knows that the Trinity is just impossible to explain and after two thousand years we’re still incompetant in describing this junk, so what’s the point? So rather than go full nihilism, they say, how about we go volunteer at a soup kitchen?

The Mystery approach starts with the understanding of the complexity and that it is not solvable with shortcuts. So instead of explaining the Trinity or defining it, they adopt a relatable image that makes it all make a little more sense. The Trinity is a Divine Dance in which all are present and all is one.

Beware of the Dark Side

What most often passes for simplicity in our lives now is often simplistic. The pressure to make things shorter and easier to spread is so rarely lovingly crafted work after countless hours of study or even the attempts of hobby podcasters to shed a little light on a challenging phenomenon. It is most often the anxious headlines of overworked editors or manipulative deceptions of minute demagogues.

It is with that pressure to produce and the demand for simple that we all collude to disinform one another. We rather take short cuts because we long for it all to make sense. And the making of sense matters more to us than the understanding of the complex problem and why the solutions offered probably aren’t going to cut it.

And the thing is: we all know this. We just label it as “bias” or “partisanship”. And we simplistically blame politicians and the media for delivering it to us like hot dogs at the ballpark. Because they shout and we keep standing up.

So if we truly want these complex things to be more simple, we need to start with our patience. And then turn to the people who are skilled at simplifying difficult concepts, and not just so we understand them, but who do so accurately. Who account for why the simplistic solutions never cut it. So that we can get the whole thing. And maybe then we can realize the simple truth: some stuff really is that complicated.
Jun 24, 2022
Lunch

Who gets to eat lunch? Who doesn’t? God expects us to show hospitality. So why do we insist on not feeding people?

Episode 29 of the Make Saints podcast: “Lunch”

the episode script

What would Jesus charge for lunch? I suppose it might depend on what it is. If he’s charging 32 bucks a pop and serving us McDonald’s, then I’d flip out.

Of course, Jesus didn’t charge the multitudes. He just took some kid’s lunch and used it to feed thousands.

So the question we might be thinking about is not what we should charge for lunch. It is if we should charge for anything.

On the one hand it is simple

Jesus didn’t charge people anything. In fact, he encouraged hospitality and the reliance on the generosity of others.

So this might mean that he does it for free. Or, as is closer, he served to the glory of God and accepted what people offered.

The fact that we find this method (of relying on what others offer us) an unreliable one says far more about us than it does the practice Jesus actually used in his own life.

What this highlights is our own refusal to operate within the paradigm that is commanded throughout Scripture and was natural for the Hebrew people of the time: hospitality.

If someone is at your door, you invite them in. If they are hungry, you feed them. These aren’t actions of the virtuous trying to be good people. This is the norm, the expectation of the culture.

Our norm is distrust and general unhospitality.

What then is hospitality for us?

I don’t think it only and precisely means that we must behave like first century Hebrew people. But it does suggest that, while we are living in step with our culture, we are out of step with God’s command. And that’s our starting place.

So how do we become more hospitable?

Well, hospitality, at its root, is defiantly not transactional. It is showing grace and generosity without regard to who the other person is or what we expect from them.

It is a generous gift.

This leads to an obvious conclusion, then: lunch should always be free.

Except…

Is hospitality within families different?

Our concerns for how we all should be paying for this food are legion. And nearly always top of mind. So it can be super easy to say: OK, got it. We give free food to our guests, but our people should pay their way.

This, of course, is reasonable and totally in line with our usual thinking. Especially if we consider the alternative: that “free” gets paid for by the organization and the organization gets funding from our offerings, so we pay for it both ways.

The problem with this reasoning in which we trace the dollars and determine costs is that we often see this as the whole of the conversation. In a very real way, we treat the idea of hospitality as mere “optics”. And not a function of the organization and its commitment to generosity.

Essentially, we render hospitality inconvenient and illogical and not, say, a command we are to do.

The Exclusivity of Charging

I have so far framed the idea of charging for lunch as a matter of hospitality. And one that I think is, at best, a slippery slope away from the gospel. But I definitely appreciate its utilitarian usefulness.

The other concern, and to me, the greater concern, is exclusion. Precisely the kind of preservation of an exclusive community.

The Church has often been a site of exclusion. From who is allowed to participate in its sacramental life to the protection of cultural norms that are most appreciated by WASPy upper middle class whites. We love to use fundraisers that utilize our class and cultural superiority: inviting the public to Tea where they might be served by uniformed volunteers or purchase the very common lunch staple: lobster.

For many, these are a bit of fun cosplay. In which we might pretend to be fancy for a little while. But others on the outside think that is exactly who we are.

Once, my Episcopal diocese cosponsored an event with the Lutheran synod and Roman Catholic diocese and the Catholic bishop thanked the Lutherans for their support in organizing and the Episcopalians…for our money.

It doesn’t matter who we think we are if stereotypes and separation clouds our vision of hospitality.

When lunch isn’t just lunch

It is no wonder that some of my friends are fighting about boxed lunches at General Convention. Because it isn’t just the idea that everyone’s gotta eat. It is full of the notion of hospitality.

This hilariously came a week after people were fighting over communion. Or more precisely, access to communion and whether hospitality is even relevant to who gets to eat that lunch.

This is deep, theological terrain for the most devoted. I am quite ambivalent toward both disputes: I have strong, conflicting emotions.

But I am genuinely moved by the idea that we be who we say we are. That hospitality and generosity ought to be our calling cards. That people feel welcome in our midst and that the love we share inspire them to want to be a part of this thing. Yes, all of this.

It also means feeding people. Eating lunch. Because we gotta eat. And some of us have the cash. And some of us don’t.

And that moment, when we think about it? That’s when people who don’t have the cash don’t show up.

Free

The economist will talk about scholarships for the needy. Microtargeting the people in need so that they understand that their lunch is free. It’s everyone else that has to pay.

More hoops. Leading to dysfunction. Exploitation. And exclusion remains. Look at college. Aid helps people go to college, but it is still overwhelmingly true that college isn’t balanced and that the poor, as a whole, are systematically boxed out.

In other words, maintaining an unbalanced system by lifting some into it won’t balance the system.

Hospitality isn’t making things free for the needy.

It is feeding who shows up.And we may have a million reasons for why we don’t want to. But none fundamentally change the fact that we aren’t called to judge. We are called to feed.

Jun 17, 2022