Re: steve jobs. The death of Steve Jobs last week elicited an outpouring of emotion across the Internet as Facebook, Twitter and all social media were graffitied with thanks for the last three decades, inspiration and superior technology. For some, the reaction had a quasi-religious tone to it, expressing that Jobs had “made the world beautiful.” Jobs represented the modern American pioneer. Adopted at infancy, Jobs would spent his teen years frequenting lectures at Hewlett-Packard Co. in Palo Alto after school while other children played baseball. After one semester at Reed College in Portland, Jobs dropped out and fell on hard and mysterious times. He convinced his professors to allow him to continue studying, auditing the classes when necessary, and spent his early twenties sleeping on the floor of friends’ apartments and eating free meals at a Hare Krisha temple. In 1974, Jobs became a Buddhist and began to express mounting frustration that others could not relate to his counter-cultural way of thinking. In 1976, he founded Apple with friend Steve Wozniak and together they recruited the brightest minds they could find in the business and technological fields to join them in their quest to “change the world.” At Superbowl XVIII, Jobs premiered Apple to the world with the sensational » « continuted online at thesemi.org
Semi Credits Managing Editor Carmen Valdés Editor Randall Frederick Production Editor Matthew Schuler
Legal Jargon The SEMI is published bi-weekly as a service to the Fuller community by the Office of Student Affairs at Fuller Theological Seminary. Articles and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the views of the Fuller administration or the SEMI.
Free Fuller Announcements: Submitted to semi@ fuller.edu or dropped off at the SEMI Office on the 3rd floor of Kreyssler Hall above the Catalyst. 35 words or less.
Advertisements: Notices for events not directly sponsored by a Fuller department, office, or organization can be submitted to semi@fuller. edu. Email us to receive Fall 2011 availability, pricing, and deadlines.
Letters to the Editor: The SEMI welcomes brief responses to articles and commentaries on issues relevant to the Fuller community. All submissions must include the author’s name and contact information and are subject to editing.
Editor’s note. BY RANDALL FREDERICK While the articles in this issue represent the general consensus of Fuller’s student body, it is important to point out one glaringly obvious fact: they place a priority on ethics and culture instead of scripture -- an editorial decision that I take responsibility for. Our writers were tasked with finding new and creative avenues to address homosexuality and sexual identity, to find means of scripture-based argument outside of scripture itself and to take the road less travelled. Fuller students, having chosen to attend an Evangelical seminary, are presumably familiar with those verses regarding homosexuality (Gen. 2, 19; Lev. 18:22, 20:13; Deut. 23:17, Romans 1:26-31; I Cor. 5:9-10; I Tim. 1:10 and Jude 7 are some of the most cited). These verses in no uncertain terms condemn homosexuality, though there is certainly room to debate whether we should continue to hold onto them in light of the precedent Peter’s vision in Acts 10 gives us. Do we indeed abandon the ancient markers for postmodern love? While subject to interpretation, the uncomfortable fact remains that quite an extensive set of gymnastics must be performed to controvert both them and the tradition of the church (2 Peter 3:16). There is a reason why translators of scripture, even modern ones, consistently view these passages in a certain light and we encourage you to weigh in on why.
According to lecturer Mark Yarhouse (see page 004), we no longer want to hear anything that sounds like a compromise on such a watershed issue for Christ and culture. To compromise would diminish the value of tradition, scholarship, reason, experience and the one thing we all hold sacred: scripture. However convincing or incendiary the contributions here may be, we must always remember that the discussion happening at Fuller is not about culture or scripture but their confluence. The Semi is proud of the articles here, knowing that there are no easy answers. As you read this issue, The Semi asks that you engage in discussion with friends, classmates, loved ones and even those you have come to see as your enemy in the weeks ahead. Scripture is not a weapon, but it does allow us to divide truth from popular opinion. Further, we ask that you consider writing your own articles and responses as we continue this discussion because it can get better. Randall S. Frederick Editor, The Semi
003
AN official fuller event
YARHOUSE
TALKS SEX
see yarhouse live oct 17 5pm travis audiorium
As part of the ongoing dialogue of the Fuller Community in understanding sexuality and ministry, Dr. Mark Yarhouse of Regent Univ. will be addressing the campus on Oct. 17 from 5 – 6:30pm in Travis Auditorium. Dr. Yarhouse is a licensed clinical psychologist and holds the Rosemarie Scotti Hughes Endowed Chair for Christian Thought in Mental Health Practice at
discriminate on the basis of sexual conduct that violates its biblically based Community Standard Statement on Sexual Standards. The seminary believes that sexual union must be reserved for marriage, which is the covenant union between one man and one woman. The seminary believes premarital, extramarital, and homosexual forms of explicit sexual conduct to be inconsistent with the teaching of Scripture. Therefore, the
“this event marks the beginning of a year-long conversation on issues of sexual identity.” Regent. He is also the founder of the Institute for the Study of Sexual Identity and conducted extensive research on the topic of sexual identity. He is the author of five books, including Homosexuality and the Christian. In a letter to the faculty from Pres. Mouw and Provost McConnell, this lecture will be the first of several activities held during the academic year to address pastoral issues within the framework of Fuller’s community standards. The standards regarding Sexual Standards and Policy Against Unlawful Discrimination, respectively, are stated as follows: Fuller Theological Seminary believes that sexual union must be reserved for marriage, which is the covenant union between one man and one woman, and that sexual abstinence is required for the unmarried. The seminary believes premarital, extramarital, and homosexual forms of explicit sexual conduct to be inconsistent with the teaching of Scripture. Consequently, the seminary expects all members of its community-students, faculty, administrators/managers, staff, and trustees--to abstain from what it holds to be unbiblical sexual practices… Fuller Theological Seminary also does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. The seminary does lawfully
seminary expects members of its community to abstain from what it holds to be unbiblical sexual practices. The event with Yarhouse marks the beginning of a year-long conversation across the Fuller community on issues of sexuality and sexual identity in response to concerns and questions that have been raised by students, alumni, and friends of Fuller on sexuality. Fuller’s administration takes these questions seriously. Over the past year the topic of sexuality has been addressed at many levels, looking at ways to foster compassionate communication, a sensitive ministerial approach and a civil, constructive discussion on sexuality and sexual identity. “Communicating about these topics is so important because none of us—no matter what our ministry or professional role—is isolated from concerns about sexuality,” says President Richard J. Mouw. “We have invited Dr. Mark Yarhouse to speak to us about the relevant research and help us discuss these topics openly as a community. This is not about any changes in policy, belief, or community standards at Fuller Seminary; rather, it’s about learning how we can listen, understand, and offer a wise and pastoral response regarding questions about sexual identity.” ▪
005
YARHOUSE BOOK REVIEW
“What does God think about homosexuality?” Scott asked. A review of “Homosexuality and the Christian” by Mark A. Yarhouse, PsyD While concluding that “homosexual behavior is not appropriate for the Christ-follower,” Yarhouse presents a thorough discussion of homosexuality, particularly addressing sexual identity and orientation. Homosexuality and the Christian engages the reader by explaining the four fundamental lenses through which this controversial topic is viewed: scripture, tradition, reason and personal experience. Though “most people don’t treat these four sources as equally authoritative,” he skillfully teases out each of the sources, both affirming and contradicting them through extensive research and incorporating suggestions and experiences from his years of professional practice. “As Christians, we should take the lead in demonstrating the love of God in real sustained relationships,” he writes. But how does that work? Is love genuine if 006
withheld or conditional or continually under the shadow of eternal judgment? Yarhouse presents a challenge to the Christian community to find better ways to support and address matters of sexuality – not a new endeavor, but one framed by real discussions with clients and families living with homosexuality each day. Further, he addresses ways in which the homosexual community has marginalized Christians and compounded the problem, particularly for individuals still struggling with their sexuality, emphasizing that “a person’s walk with God, their spiritual maturity, [and] their depth of character is not contingent on the degree of change of sexual orientation they experience.” Readers may take issue with Yarhouse’s conclusion, but his contribution to the topic on how to best separate “samesex attraction” from “gay identity” is helpful and insightful while framed within Christian ethics. ▪
four masks
A LOOK BACKWARD IN HOP
HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE HISTORY brokeback mountain
About five years ago, when I was studying to be a mechanical engineer in college, I received an email from the pastor of a church I had attended. The pastor of this church, whom I had known my entire life, authored a column in the local newspaper and was alerting the congregation of his latest submission. It was titled, “Hollywood Versus a Biblical Worldview.” 008
The article was published in response to the film Brokeback Mountain, famous for discussion of all flavors in Protestant communities. In the column, my pastor argued that though he has known amiable gay men, “It’s not a question of whether or not gay men can be ‘nice guys,’ nor is it a question of whether they can be masculine, rugged or capable of deep love. The real question
PES OF SEEING FORWARD:
Y OF PSYCHIATRY
is whether or not homosexuality is ‘normal,’ no matter what sort of man practices it. God answers that question loud and clear— ‘Homosexuality is wrong, and all sexual immorality is sin.’” (Maurer, 2006). This argument is typically manifested today in the belief that gay individuals are not perverse, per se, but need help.
BY CHRIS KEIPER
A more insidious position than it seems on the surface, churches have taken what James Nelson calls the “rejectingnon-punitive position”, in that the “ism” of gay identity must be rejected, but not the person (Nelson, 1978, p. 189). The concept here is that, as humans, we can separate an identity from the person and act with exclusivity toward LGBT behaviors and desires as pathological 009
without denying essential components of personhood. It represents a fundamental rift in our psychology of sexuality. Those parts of the self that are distasteful to our theological interpretations can be represented as pathological while maintaining an unchanged, beneficent attitude. While not a new argument, I believe it is ultimately unsustainable for producing loving behaviors. The central issue of ‘abnormality’ regarding sexual variations has only recently begun to shift in Evangelical Christendom. Although societal changes have contributed to less overt rejection of gay individuals, the typical crux for many Christians engaging in dialog about ethical stances toward
identities, and practices to some are quite aberrant to others. The debate within contemporary Christianity is not so different from that of the mental health profession in the 1970s. For many decades, the psychological world was convinced that same-sex attraction represented a fundamental distortion in the human psyche. The logic was self-evident: if biology provides mammals with complementary sex organs, no natural cause seems to exist for attraction within the same sex. Still, others argued that if homosexuality was pathological, science should be able to demonstrate concurrent psychological dysfunction within these individuals. The heat of the debate, catalyzed by protests from
“The debate within contemporary Christianity is not so different from that of the mental health profession in the 1970s.the psychological world was convinced that same-sex attraction represented a fundamental distortion in the human psyche.” the LGBT community is whether or not these identities constitute sin, and thus deviant or unhealthy behavior. As an emerging clinical psychologist, my field has historically been concerned with this exact question: find what is “abnormal” so that the identified cause of a problem may be treated. The difficulty of this lies in defining normality. When applying the clinical lens to human sexuality, or any domain of naturally occurring biological behaviors, we immediately run into road blocks. What are “normal” sexual mores, 010
pro-gay groups such as the New York Gay Activist Alliance, culminated in a contentious ethical battle between psychiatrists almost 40 years ago (Bayer, 1981). Until 1973, the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual considered homosexuality a “psychological pathology” - a clinical issue. The DSM is considered the “bible” of the psychological field as a handbook that is relied on by medical, psychological, and social practitioners for diagnosis and treatment of mental dysfunction.
Despite the sexual orientation of numerous gay psychiatrists, no one challenged the internal logic that suggested same-sex attraction was disease-like. Several psychiatrists, closeted until the DSM change, felt that the issue was too secretive to ever debate openly without revealing themselves. They felt severe repercussions would incur if they lived openly as gay individuals. At the 1971 APA convention, one psychiatrist disguised himself so that he could speak of the struggle of gay practitioners, saying “we must make sure that we behave ourselves and that no one in a position of power is aware of our preference and/or gender identity… Those who are willing to speak out openly will do so only if they have little to lose, and if you have little to lose, you won’t be listened to” (Bayer, 1981, p. 110). Though this was an important first step in the events that led up to the DSM definition change, many opposed it, claiming it went against science
Still, in 1973 the APA changed the language of the DSM to reflect that same-sex attraction was no longer considered a fundamental pathology. It has since been against the APA Code of Ethics for a practicing psychiatrist or psychologist to treat sexual homosexuality as a mental illness. Any attempt to change a client’s sexual orientation is discouraged (American Psychological Association, 2009). It is important to note that it was not science that redirected the mental health community and American culture to become more accepting of same–sex orientation, but personal interactions with gay individuals. The radio program This American Life has chronicled the long and complicated forces that allowed for change to take place with an award winning episode and evidences at least one point very clearly: the change in the DSM was not primarily scientific in nature, but rather culturally determined (Spiegel, 2002) . Often attributed to a few key psychiatrists, namely Robert Spitzer, the reality of the transformation
“It certainly would feel more secure to say there is a scientific answer to our deepest moral questions. Because then we could use the rod of science to beat back those we don’t agree with.” and professional opinion. Charles Socarides, a preeminent psychiatrist on homosexuality at the time, would later write that “well over 90%” of APA psychiatrists agreed that homosexual desire was psychologically pathological (Spiegel, 2002).
in the definition resulted from slow changes in psychological theory, protests by gay activists, closeted gay psychiatrists, and a handful of research studies.
011
One of the difficulties in the change of the diagnosis was that both campsthe psychiatrists and activists who wanted this language removed, and the psychiatrists who insisted it stayclaimed the truth of science to back their positions. Robert Bayer, who has written a book about the history of the movement, summarized, “Do we see sexuality as a source of fulfillment or a sin of our birth? Those are all moral questions… It certainly would feel more secure to say there is a scientific answer to our deepest moral questions. Because then we could use the rod of science to beat back those we don’t agree with. But I don’t think we have that option.” (Spiegel, 2002). It is not a stretch to suggest that when discussing gay identity in the church, we encounter similar issues. Most, myself included, want to appeal to an authority greater than our culture. We seem to find this in holy scriptures, but, as with any discussion worth having, there is disagreement about how to understand and interpret the passages. On one level it is comforting to believe we don’t have to take responsibility for our beliefs, especially our ethics. Our experience can become secondary to that which is evident for all to see so plainly printed on the page and etched in stone. But sexual ethics have changed, even within the orthodoxy of the church. Considering the role of the larger community and with that dogmatic appeal to continually reform, we must ask ourselves if this is a reform worth undertaking even while our faith practitioners remain disguised among us. Although couched behind theory, the latent non-acceptance of LGBT 012
individuals has made it difficult for people to be honest about their identities and love life. There are gay students who attend Fuller, with varying feelings about their own same-sex attraction, and such has been the case for many years. As with the closeted psychiatrists of the 1970s, it is difficult to be transparent in an environment where they are precluded from legitimacy based on a singular interpretation, which, at its heart, is cultural. ▪ Chris Keiper is a fourth year student studying clinical psychology, and splits his time between the demands of the program, church choir, writing and discussing beer. You can read more of his strange thoughts at www.commentarial.com
American Psychological Association (2009). Resolution on appropriate responses to sexual orientation distress and change efforts. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/about/governance/ council/policy/sexual-orientation.aspx Bayer, R. (1981). Homosexuality and American psychiatry: The politics of diagnosis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Maurer, K. (2006, March 6). Hollywood versus a Biblical worldview. Mansfield New Journal , p. C3. Nelson, J. B. (1978). Embodiment: An approach to sexuality and Christian theology. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House. Spiegel, A. (2002). (2002, January 18). This American Life. [Audio podcast]. Retrieved from http:// www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/ episode/204/81-words
WHOSE AUTHORITY?
by joel harrison
Last spring, I made the decision to tackle homosexuality with the high schoolers in my youth group. They had let me know that they wanted to talk about things that were “real” and “challenging”—so I gave them what to me is the biggest hot-button issue in the church today: homosexuality. It wasn’t hard to figure out how to approach it. I never once considered getting up in front of them, reading from Romans, and telling them that homosexuality is a sin. Or is not a sin. Before becoming a youth pastor, I taught composition at the Univ. of Colorado for two years and can tell you
with certainty that when students go off to college, they desperately want to forge their own way in the world, to make their own decisions — or at least feel like they are. The reality is that when dealing with students, what they are desperately searching for is authority -- just not that of their parents or church. For me to become another “authority” would have identified whatever I said as negative from the outset and, depending on what side of the issue they chose, counterproductive. Instead, I resolved from the outset to emphasize informed decision making through 013
careful study of scripture and respectful conversation with other informed people. My teaching tool towards this end was a 2006 television series produced by the Sundance Channel which followed the life of Jay Bakker, One Punk Under God. The series covers a number of issues and personal struggles that Bakker was going through at the time, like his efforts to reconcile with his estranged father, care for his dying mother and follow his (then) wife to Atlanta. Additionally, it addressed Bakker’s decision that homosexuality is not a sin. By watching the series, the students saw someone wrestle through the issue, come to a decision, and then have to interact with people
a sin. The mom confessed that their relationship was strained, and that she feared her youngest child would come to see her and her husband the same way. In addition to informed decision making, I wanted the students to understand that someone is not bigoted, prejudiced or against Jesus, against the Bible, or not a Christian at all because of where they stand on this one particular issue, which is easy to see being here at Fuller. There are a wide diversity of beliefs, orthodox and progressive, that you would not be able to survive here with extremist worldviews on either side of the spectrum.
One parent politely explained how important this issue is, how if his student didn’t come out on the “correct” side of the issue, there could be “consequences.” who disagreed with him, sometimes vehemently—particularly his father, which afforded us the opportunity to talk about the importance of family in relation to difficult problems like this. As we were starting the series, I sent an email to the parents of their high schoolers giving them the rationale for the approach I was going to use. One mom emailed back saying that her family needed serious help with the issue. The eldest of their children, a college student, refused to discuss homosexuality with them at all. She had even called her parents bigots for believing that homosexuality is 014
The students, for the most part, came to understand that. In addition to the series, I laid out what our denomination’s official position has been (that homosexuality is a sin) while another staff member (also a Fuller student) and I each offered readings of Romans 1:18-32, emphasizing that these were but two potential interpretations. I was happy with the students’ responses and their commitment to begin again with this issue by studying scripture and talking to their parents openly about it. A few parents, however, did not see things the same way.
One parent politely requested a sit down with me and another staff member. He explained how important this issue is, how if his student didn’t come out on the “correct” side of the issue, there could be “consequences.” There was never any clarity regarding what those consequences would be. He admitted, just like the mom who
“I wanted the students to understand that someone is not bigoted, prejudiced or against Jesus because of where they stand on this one particular issue” had emailed me, that he had a strained relationship with one of his older children over this issue and the same thing was beginning to happen with his high school student. No matter what I said to assure him that allowing his daughter to come to her own decision was the best option, was really the best way to preserve her faith in college over this issue, he couldn’t be convinced. I can only speculate about his fear, about those undefined “consequences,” but I think some parents see this issue as a type of gateway drug. Taking the wrong stance on this issue could result in a student having a softened faith, a faith in name only, which would inevitably cascade into losing faith altogether. Parents like this forget about being concerned with whether or not a
student’s spiritual life is active, whether or not they strive to live the gospel every day, as if believing homosexuality is not a sin is a sure sign that they are not living the gospel. I don’t want to suggest that this isn’t an important issue. It is. We all know it. But when did Paul, or Jesus for that matter, say that our salvation or the measure of how well we are living as disciples is dependent upon whether or not we believe homosexuality to be a sin? Questions like this seem common enough to be cliché, so with great sobriety I wonder why we insist on defining good discipleship using issues like this when our focus should be on a people negatively affected by our historically awful attitude toward people who are homosexuals. As Dr. Mouw said, we have done a terrible job of addressing this issue and like him, I’m convinced there is a better way. Trying to treat people right, the way Jesus would have treated them, is the only reason this issue is important; not because our status in the kingdom is at stake. Christians are probably going to continue to struggle with this issue for the foreseeable future. In the meantime, we should probably be more concerned with how we’re coming alongside them as they wrestle with how best to bring the Kingdom of God to Earth without taking an absolute stance on homosexuality. ▪ Joel Harrison (MAT, 2012) is a former English teacher and aspiring scholar. He earned his MA in English in 2009 from the University of Northern Colorado. He is the Director of Student Ministries at Pasadena Covenant Church and featured writer for A Church Unbound.
015
WE NEED TO TALK BY ALEX LAZO
When I decided to write an article relating to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues, I was both inspired and nervous about how to go about this. I feel that this is an important opportunity to address an issue to which is given disappointingly little attention in the Fuller community. As a graduate of the School of Intercultural Studies and a current student in the School of Psychology, I am invested in the Fuller community, having gained invaluable insight into my own life and that of the world around me. From this, I have gained a new perspective. During my time at Fuller, I can honestly recall engaging in only a handful of lecture topics, campus seminars, or group discussions relating to LGBT issues. This isn’t surprising when you compare our community to the predominant culture, which until recently has contributed very little to awareness of issues within LGBT
these matters -- all stemming from an apathy towards understanding the LGBT community. I do not wish to bash our community or, by extension, the larger Evangelical world, but I do believe that a new perspective is crucial. We are moving into a culture where certain issues must be addressed, and whether we want to or not, we must wrestle with the unavoidable. Simply put: most lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender people do not have a good attitude toward Christianity or religion in general. Many feel rejected by the Christian community, which I feel is completely valid based on our history. Spirituality is an important issue to many LGBT people, but many face challenges when they attempt to integrate with religious communities that refuse to even listen and engage in their stories. Consequently, many abandon the people and principles that prove intolerant and seek the openness
“if God does have some view on homosexuality, I’m confident that He would be flat out enraged by our marginalization of them.” communities. In general, our society has maintained homophobic tendencies and Fuller reflects those same tendencies. Homophobia (together with biphobia and transphobia) is an extreme aversion to homosexuality and is manifested both implicitly and explicitly, outwardly as much as indirectly. Members of Fuller’s community are both fearful of conversations about LGBT populations and ignorant about issues that arise when these conversations happen, uncomfortable when talking about
of other communities. While several gay-affirming churches exist, they remain a minority and continue to carry the stigma of injustice. Comedienne Margaret Cho has a bit where she says “I want Jesus to come back and say, ‘That’s not what I meant!” Cho, a supporter of LGBT rights and a self-identified bisexual, is one of many expressing their frustration with and resentment of social structures that oppress people. Whether the bit is 017
amusing or not, the suggestion that Christians have misunderstood what the Bible has to say about what it means to love others is valid. LGBT communities are, and always have been, marginalized groups of people. The victimization of homosexuals in several parts of the world is evidence of this. Over the last decade, the bullying and at times subsequent suicide rate of gay youth has become a legitimate concern. I am hardly suggesting that the Christian faith is the chief culprit in sexual violence, but this is a time where we need to ask ourselves some hard questions about what our community, the Fuller community, is doing to take initiative and deliver hope, faith, love and justice - those weightier matters of the law. For some time, I have tried to categorically avoid all conversations regarding what God thinks about homosexuality. To be candid, with my education at Fuller and clinical training in different settings, I have concluded that there are no answers that will prove anything to anyone who has already developed an opinion about this. But if God does have some view on homosexuals, I’m confident that God would be flat out enraged by our marginalization of them. Fuller is a part of the Los Angeles community, home to one of the largest LGBT populations in the United States. Avoidance of issues related to these groups proves to be nothing but intolerant. Not only are we locally connected to LGBT communities, but Fuller has its own community of people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and possibly transgender. For this reason alone, we can no longer shelve these conversations. Therefore, I appeal to students, faculty and staff at Fuller to openly and actively ask questions 018
and take steps toward dialogues about LGBT issues because they are, in fact, relevant to us. We cannot delay these conversations any longer, as we’ve been doing so far. Issues that arise within and around LGBT communities are diversity-related issues that we should be excited to explore. Sexuality, in general, is a gray area that we are continuing to study at great length. Pontification on whether we believe homosexuality is right or wrong is not what LGBT communities need to hear. Further, beliefs about what is right and wrong should not govern how others are treated. Like any other marginalized group, we instead need to listen to their stories and experiences. As students of theology, we become catalysts for spiritual formation. As intercultural studies students, we are driven by ideals of justice. As experts in psychology, we train to enhance quality of life through health. As members of Fuller, our ultimate endeavor is to do what Jesus tells us to do - love one another as we would ourselves, enable and support individuals to thrive in their personhood, relationships, ambitions, gifts, and abilities. We are able to do this for others when we listen to them and learn about their lives. It is for this reason that we, as a community, cannot avoid LGBT communities or remain passive in the related issues that arise. If we continue to place these issues on the margin, we prove the stereotypes of hatred and bigotry to be true of Christianity. When Fuller acknowledges and confronts these matters, it stands against dehumanizing and oppressive forces and joins alongside LGBT communities with hope and promise for change. ▪ Alex Lazo is a graduate of SIS and currently a 3rd-year doctoral student in the SOP. He is currently training at the LA Gay and Lesbian Center as a clinical intern.
Fuller will be hosting a block party on Oct. 14 from 3:30 - 10pm. The Writer’s Staff, in conjunction with the Brehm Center, Fuller Co. and Reel Spirituality have gathered several live bands and artists for the party on campus, highlighting the diversity of the campus and student organizations. “The Writer’s Staff decided to have a block party similar to the cities that we’re from and that we haven’t seen at Fuller,” said Andrea Gacs. “I’m from San Jose, Jacqueline Williams is from Houston and Esther Maria is from New York. We’re far from home, wanted to share our cultures and started asking around if other people felt the same way. When I was growing up, for instance, block parties were every summer -- not to mention the ones at church. You’d get singers from the community, kids doing martial arts, food and you just had a great time meeting new people.” The Block Party has been developing since May, ensuring quality involvement from supporters and performers. The Brehm Center will be presenting live bands on a stage in the prayer garden across from Hubbard Library; the Fuller Company, a theater group, will be performing three times throughout the night; and Reel
Spirituality, Fuller’s film department, will create a Sundance-themed film and musicvideo lounge for visitors. Live bands Philly and Nashville; The Gillian Grannum Band and The Michael Wright Project in addition to poetry readings, an opera performance by Fred Davidson, a dance performance and a special performance by the Korean Children’s Choir. Student groups will also have information booths. “We’ll have lots of food throughout the evening,” said Gacs. “Soul food, Korean bbq, Thai food, even a taco station. Every ethnic department on campus will be there between five and seven for tastings, but not all at the same time. Lots of different foods will be added throughout the night.” Depending on what is chosen, $5 will purchase one to three samples per station. “We’ll also have a cupcake bake-off in the SOP area, so the tickets can get you a treat as well.” Other than the food, the Block Party is free to all students. Creating a family environment, a bounce-house and games will be available in addition to a photo booth area for red-carpet shots outside the film lounge in Travis Auditorium. Band Schedule on page 030. 019
IF YOU WERE GAY THAT’D BE OK. BY MATTHEW SCHULER
IT GETS BETTER Two weeks ago in Las Vegas, Lady Gaga suddenly stopped the iHeartRadio music festival mid-fist-pump in order to dedicate her next song to a young, dead, homosexual. Twenty thousand fans stood silently as the florid performer slowly took a seat behind her piano and looked to the massive screen floating above the stage. The image of a fourteen-year-old boy appeared. He was Jamey Rodemeyer, a high-schooler from Buffalo, New York who had committed suicide only days before the festival. After posting 020
a personal video to the It Gets Better Project website, Jamey became the victim of intense internet hate speech and bullying, particularly from his classmates. “JAMIE IS STUPID, GAY, FAT ANND [sic] UGLY. HE MUST DIE!” one post said. “I wouldn’t care if you died. No one would. So just do it It would make everyone WAY more happier!” said another. Days later, Jeremy hung himself. The tragedy ignited a webstorm, enraging the homosexual community and Gaga herself. “The past days I’ve spent reflecting, crying, and yelling. I have so much anger. It is hard to feel love when cruelty takes someones
life. Bullying must become illegal. It is a hate crime,” she posted to Twitter. The It Gets Better Project was launched in 2009 to address that very issue. LGBT youth don’t have an easy time growing up, often forced to hide their sexuality to avoid being taunted and tormented, even tortured, just for being themselves. The It Gets Better website is essentially a gallery of videos posted by openly gay adults and mentors who want to help struggling youth. While many LGBT teens can’t imagine a positive future, the members of It Gets Better can. Video after video describe a life of happiness, positivity, and potential, assuring them that they are not alone, that it will get better. We see these same dynamics at Fuller. Many gay students feel forced to hide who they are in order to avoid ridicule, rejection, even expulsion. We have peers, classmates and co-workers who also hope that it will get better. But working in churches or other evangelical ministries, it often doesn’t get better. LGBT individuals serving the Christian machine often end up hiding who they are for a lifetime. This is strange, since the message of Jesus is hope, not fear. God is for truth, not deception. POEMS / PRODUCTS If you were an Ephesian, you were from the west coast. The beachside city was once the second largest city in the world, shadowed only by Rome itself. It was a magnet for artists and actors from every corner of the empire, a metropolis teeming with new media and breakout culture. In the heart of downtown Ephesus stood the mega-temple of Artemis. It was crafted and constructed by the top architects of the day, and
named one of the seven wonders of the world. The cult of Artemis evolved into an exclusive network of premiere international designers and production houses. Their biggest seller? Idols. They made millions of them, tiny figurines immaculately detailed and stunning to hold, each depicting whatever god or goddess a paying client wanted to pitch. The Artemis network even had gigantic storehouses of “blank” idols that could be shaped and detailed at moment’s notice. Artwork from Ephesus became a worldwide phenomenon. In a letter to the church in Ephesus, a Jew named Paul explains that “we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works.” The word “workmanship” is the Greek word poeima. It means “artwork” or “masterpiece.” It’s where we get the word “poem.” We are God’s poem. Paul was a craftsman himself, he was a company man. He worked in the industry, he knew people. So when he says “workmanship,” he is saying “you people of Ephesus, you know how to make artwork out of the gods. But my God is different. My God makes artwork out of people.” There is another word that Paul uses to describe how we understand and interact with humanity. It is found in chapter 5 of the letter, and it is usually translated “sexual immorality.” It is the word porneio. Porneio was originally an economics term, used to describe something that someone was taking to market. A porneio was something to be sold. So for Paul, there were two distinct ways of interacting with a fellow human being. There was poeima, treated like a poem, artwork, masterpiece. And there was porneio, treated like an object to be sold. Poems, or products. 021
I see these two opposing dynamics all around me, all the time. For some, love and sex and intimacy is about what I can get out of it. I have a need, and you fill that need. For others, love and sex is not about what you get, but what you give. Good art evokes, it pulls out of us, we give to it. Poetry requires a response, it’s about what it is rather than what it does. Products, on the other hand, simply do. They exist not for what they are in and of themselves, but for what functions they can perform. It is the difference between getting off and making love. It is the difference between “servicing” someone and becoming one with them. Sex leaves us empty when we feel like we’ve had something taken from us, rather than feeling like we’ve been given to, and have given back. Sexual immorality, then, is an unhealthy view of sex that treats the other person as a product. This happens in any relationship, heterosexual or homosexual. I’ve seen it happen in marriages of forty years, I’ve seen it happen in high school. Poeima can also happen in any relationship. Heterosexual, or homosexual. Christians often roll homosexuality into the New Testament term “sexual immorality,” but porneio has nothing to do with sexual orientation. It is about how sex is experienced and used. Is it an object to be obtained, or a masterpiece to be enjoyed? Is it the “naked and felt no shame” of Genesis 2, or the “fig leaves” of Genesis 3? Is it honesty or deception? Now, at this point, someone will mention Leviticus 18, and probably Sodom and Gomorrah. Regarding Sodom and Gomorrah, the poster city for sexual deviancy, God’s judgment is for gang rape, not homosexuality. Rape is porneio. Regarding the Levitical code, we find 022
that 18:6 and 20:13 both clearly condemn homosexuality. Leviticus is a holiness code written 3,000 years ago and partially borrowed from the Code of Hamurrabi. It also includes prohibitions against round haircuts, tattoos, working on the Sabbath, wearing garments of mixed fabrics, getting your fortune told, and even playing with the skin of a pig (there goes football). As evangelicals, we often don’t observe clear commandments from Jesus himself, such as helping the poor or abstaining from divorce, and we certainly don’t observe Torah. If “the Bible says so” isn’t good enough for these other issues, why this one? SOFTWIRED If you’re a fruit fly, sticking one wing out and dancing in a circle will get you laid. In 2010, researchers from the University of Glasgow and the University of Oxford demonstrated that by modifying the DSX gene in fruit flies, they could flip them from heterosexual to homosexual, and back again, like a light switch. Males will point their wing and circle other males, not females. According to the research, gender and sexual preference are genetic, at least in fruit flies. Mice are a different story. They are mammals, and used in medical studies because their bodies react much like ours do. Researchers from Korea’s Advanced Institute of Science and Technology managed to alter the sexual behavior of female mice by removing a single gene, called FucM (yes I know, I laughed out loud at this too). They observed that female mice deprived of the FucM gene refused advances from male mice, instead trying to mate with female mice. Slight hormonal differences in the womb produced lesbian mice. (Footnote 1)
I mention this because evangelical Christians love to tell people what not to do, and often use the Bible to support their master list of don’ts. But the prohibitive commandments in the Bible have to do with behavior. They are about what we do, or don’t do. “Don’t steal, don’t murder.” These are behaviors. But homosexuality is not about what you do. It’s about who you are. It’s about identity, not behavior. Like a poem, not a product. It is less about the functions or acts that are performed, but who you are in and of yourself. This is different than a genetic disposition toward alcoholism. Alcoholism is a disease that drives destructive behavior. It is a disposition toward a certain type of addiction. Humans can be addicted to anything, including sex, heterosexual or homosexual. But addiction is about what a person can get out of something, the hit or buzz received, classic porneio. Some homosexuals are addicted to sex, promiscuity, and sexual immorality. But so are heterosexuals. And so are Christian heterosexuals. At Fuller, we are still stuck on lists of don’ts. The ethos is “don’t practice homosexuality, or there will be consequences.” But it’s not simply behavior, it’s identity. For LGBT students, “it’s not ok to do that” becomes “it’s not ok to be who you are.” And that, is a claim against God’s workmanship. As Christians, we want and need clear sexual standards. We need guidance and wisdom to form a poeima view of love and sex and intimacy. But to say to a homosexual, “we’re sorry, you will never get to experience a healthy, vibrant relationship full of love and sex and intimacy” is to rob them of poeima. And that, is exactly the mentality that the It Gets Better Project is fighting against, the
sort of thinking that eventually can grow into something so ugly and sharp that it kills people like Jamey Rodemeyer. As a student body, may we love well, especially those who religion usually rejects. May we be full of hope, not fear, when discussing these deeply personal, and sometimes painful, issues in the coming academic year. May we be for truth, not deception, for poeima, not porneio. May we have faith that it will get better. ▪ Matthew Schuler (M.Div) is a musician, author, and artist currently enjoying James Blake and Karen Armstrong. He writes at snowtone.org/blog.
Footnote 1 There are many factors that contribute to sexual orienation, including social and environmental factors. I chose to focus on the latest genetic research because I found it to be the most interesting. It should also be noted that envoronmental factors shape identity as well, and such factors are not necessarly bad, they simply are.
Related Links: 01 It Gets Better Promo (bit.ly/getsbettervid) 02 Gaga Dedication (abcn.ws/gagajamey) 03 Jamey’s Video (bit.ly/jameyvid) 04 Fruit Flies (bit.ly/dsxgene) 05 Mice (bit.ly/lesbianmice)
023
SECOND REFORMATION AND SAFE PLACES BY RANDALL FREDERICK
We can no longer deny, John Shore of The Huffington Post writes, that “Christianity really is in the middle of a second Reformation.” The issue of sexuality, both hetero and homosexual, has been building momentum in religious discourse. In May, the Presbyterian Church (USA) changed their constitution, allowing their 173 presbyteries to ordain “without regard to sexual orientation.” This decision overturned their previous 1996 affirmation of “fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness.” In June, the New York State Senate voted 32-29 to legalize same-sex marriages. That same month, a leaked internal memo from the Archbishop of Canterbury expressed concern over how to comply with Britain’s Equality Act of 2010, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. In early Sept., three men were executed in Iran for “forbidden acts against religion” in violation of Articles 108 and 110 of shariat (acts of sodomy). In the last three years, punk pastor Jay Bakker has led a public campaign with The American Family Outing in an effort to recruit prominent Evangelical pastors to affirm homosexuality in their churches. Notably, Bakker visited Joel Osteen, T.D. Jakes, Bill Hybels and Fuller alum Rob Bell asking for their televised support. So far, none of these pastors have done so. Instead, it seems the endeavor has rallied them against the issue. In Jan. of this year, Joel Osteen answered Bakker in a CNN interview with Piers Morgan, “I have always believed the scripture shows that it is a sin… I don’t believe homosexuality is God’s best for a person’s life.” In an interview with The Dallas Voice in 2009, Jakes voiced the opinion of many pastors
across America, stating that he would never hire a “sexually active gay person,” believing homosexuality is “brokenness” that requires “restorative grace.” It would be easy to dismiss television ministers as pontificating from their media empires, but Jakes’ son was arrested in a “gay sting operation” shortly before the article was published. The issue has a face and a name and, as we all know, dogmatic opinions are capricious enough to change once we love someone. Still, while Jakes’ statement may seem resolute, it inherently possesses a question mark for the astute reader. Active? What does that mean exactly? Doesn’t it sound suspiciously like the recently repealed “don’t ask, don’t tell” mandate of the military? But while televangelism is not the exclusive domain of the debate, it is the most visible as we work out these questions. Bakker, the son of televangelist Jim & Tammy Faye Bakker, agreed to be filmed for One Punk Under God so “people could see where we were coming from--that all Christians aren’t closed-minded, angry right-wing conservative people.” As editor of The Semi, I have tried for several weeks to get Fuller faculty and administrators to speak on this issue. Most refused to comment, and those who did expressed serious reservation, asking for anonymity. The current All-Seminary Council, for instance, was reluctant to release a report two of their previous Vice-Presidents conducted, Proposal for Constructive Dialog Regarding Sexual Orientation at Fuller Theological Seminary (available upon request from the ASC office). Even fellow students were skittish, expressing that they didn’t want to write an article because it might hurt some of their friendships, that they weren’t ready, and that “to be perfectly honest, I’m not 025
sure what to say when the Bible is so clearly against it.” I am a Southerner, born and raised in Louisiana where we have an expression, colloquial as it may be, “Them folks is more nervous than a cat in a room full of rocking chairs.” I have never seen such immediate tension, not even when conducting interviews regarding the rape of three sorority members in my hometown. This is why it was surprising to find the sole exception in President Mouw, who candidly shared his thoughts. “Seminaries need to be safe places,” he said. “Evangelicals have done a terrible job of addressing single-sex issues and we discuss a lot of ideas here at Fuller. I would never want to create an environment where someone who is struggling with these sort of feelings to feel like we were making it worse. Last week, I spoke with several other seminary presidents and we’re all struggling with how to address this. It’s not just Fuller. I think one of the best ways of addressing it has been done by Gordon-Cornwell Seminary. They have an anonymous online discussion board where students
Christianity, counter to conventional opinion, has been progressive since the Early Church. Race relations, ageism and ethical food consumption were some of the first issues we addressed even while encouraging new believers to pursue peace, to lose friendships if necessary, but to be courageous above all - even in the face of death. It is a well documented (and blogged) fact that we have lost that pioneering spirit in our journey westward. And Dr. Mouw is right. Evangelicals are not known for our sympathetic treatment of, well, anything lately. Which is why his response may seem controversial to you now that you see it in print, even though it is part of a long tradition of Christian civility. In a 1985 article for Christianity Today, even as the sexual revolution was normalizing, champion of conservative thought John Stott wrote, “However strongly we may disapprove of homosexual practices, we have no liberty to dehumanize those who engage in them.” As believers, we face many challenges today. But sexuality is not the only one. Ethically, we know where we stand. No
“we’re all struggling with how to address this. It’s not just Fuller.” can say whatever they want from, ‘I’ve known I was a lesbian since I was nine years old,’ to ‘The Bible says this and this, our Conduct Agreement says this and this and I don’t see why we’re even discussing this any more.’ The thing is that yes, this is an issue. But it’s not the only one in the world.”
026
one committed to the cause of Christ will knowingly and willfully oppress another human being, and so we face this challenge, like all the others that have preceded it, with confidence and boldness that truth will prevail, will set us free, and will in time unite us all. ▪ Randall Frederick (M.Div, 2013) previously worked as a media consultant for non-profit organizations and was THE editor of several art publications.
INSURRECTION: TO BELIEVE IS HUMAN TO DOUBT, DIVINE
coming to fuller’s pasadena campus oct 21, 7pm Book excerpt from Insurrection by Peter Rollins Copyright © 2011. Reprinted by permission of Howard Books, a division of Simon & Schuster.
THERE IS A FIRE INSIDE THE BUILDING; PLEASE STEP INSIDE Each epoch in the life of the Church arises from the white-hot fires of a fundamental question, a question that burns away the husk that was once thought to be essential in order to reveal once more the revolutionary event heralded by Christ’s Crucifixion and Resurrection. Such questions do not address the vast sea of disagreements that exist within the shared theological horizon of an era but challenge the very horizon itself. They place into question the various assumptions that these groups all take for granted. They cut across what is assumed, short-circuit what is hallowed, and, in so doing,
appear on the scene as a profound threat to the very essence of Christianity. They offer us a unique opportunity to rethink what it means to be the Church, not merely critiquing the presently existing Church for failing to live up to its ideals, but rather for espousing the wrong ideals. The first question of this kind was related to the issue of circumcision. At the very founding of the Church, a heated debate broke out concerning whether or not this outward sign was a requirement for Gentile converts. This was a controversial issue at the time, but when the dust finally settled, a decision had been made. New converts would not need to undergo circumcision in order to participate in the full life of the Church. This decision, known as the “Apostolic Decree,” was revolutionary and helped to establish the unique identity of the Christian community. More than this, it 027
helped bring to light the idea that faith concerned a total life transformation rather than some outward mark. There have been various pivotal debates like this one over the life of the Church, debates that gave rise to monasticism, that provoked the split between Eastern and Western branches of Christianity, and that spawned the Protestant Reformation. Like the discussions concerning circumcision, each of these historical debates marked a radical transformation in the Church of its day. As such we may link them directly to what gave rise to the Apostolic Decree by calling them “Circumcision Questions.” Giving them this name not only links them directly to the first fundamental question that arose in the Christian community but also refers to the nature of these questions as such, for they are never concerned with addition
I suggest that we stand once more at the threshold of such a question, a question that houses the power to provoke a rupturing and re‑configuring of the present manifestation of Christianity. It is an incendiary question that houses the very power to set the Church alight, burning away the rot to reveal that which cannot be consumed. This is why the task of working through a circumcision question can never be described as some project in constructive theology; it is a work of pyro-theology. While circumcision questions attempt to bring us back to a central truth-event of faith, we must not confuse them with the reactionary movements that seek to return to the early Church— the Church in some more ancient, and supposedly purified, form. There are those who want to go back to the way the Church was
“What is this point from which we may gain the leverage to overturn the Church as it presently stands, in its conservative, liberal, evangelical, fundamentalist, and orthodox forms?” (working out what needs to be added to the message as it currently stands) but with subtraction (debating what needs to be cut away). A circumcision question asks us to remove something previously thought of as vital in order to help unveil, in an apocalyptic way, the central scandal of Christianity. 028
before Constantine, when it is thought that religious authorities became extensions of the State. There is an attempt to return to the Church before the influence of Neo-Platonism when, those people say, Greek philosophy perverted the message. And there are even those who want to return to the Church before Paul—who some believe
reduced the message of Christ to a set of rules and dogmas. Such moves, however, fall short, not because they go back too far, but because they fail to go back far enough. The truly revolutionary move is not to chart a return to the early Church, but to the event that gave birth to the early Church. The return called for by circumcision questions is not concerned with some stretching back into the past, for the event that gave birth to the early Church is present now. It is not lost in some long-forgotten era to be unearthed anew but rather dwells as an ever-present potential that we are invited to make actual in our bodies. In the aftermath of a circumcision question, an expression of Church life arises that may look utterly different from anything that went before it, yet it is fed by the same blood that pulsed through the old, remaining true to it by advancing boldly into the new. So what is the question that presents itself at this time in the history of Christianity? What is this point from which we may gain the leverage to overturn the Church as it presently stands (in its conservative, liberal, evangelical, fundamentalist, and orthodox forms)? The theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer succinctly articulated the answer shortly before his execution by the Nazis. In a compilation of his personal correspondence entitled Letters and Papers from Prison, he wrote of how the question for us today is whether or not religion is necessary in order to participate fully in the life testified to by Christ. For Bonhoeffer, religion at its most basic defined a particular way of thinking about and
relating to God, a way of approaching God as the solution to problems such as fear, ignorance, or despair. He wrote of the next epoch in Church life as one that would utterly transcend this impotent God whose only job is to provide us with a psychological crutch (what we will call the God of religion, or the religious God) and usher in what he called “religionless Christianity.â€? Bonhoeffer was executed before he was able to develop his project, and we are left with only fragments of his vision, fragments that are pregnant with possibility. In Insurrection, I endeavor to outline what this radical expression of a faith beyond religion might look like and how it has the power to give birth to a radically new form of Church, one with the power to renew, reform or even transcend the present constellation of conservative, liberal, evangelical, fundamentalist, and orthodox communities. This work of pyro-theology will involve outlining the present understanding of God, exploring the way Crucifixion and Resurrection open up a different reality, and charting what might arise should we be courageous enough to step into this reality. This will not be easy; many will find the attempt disturbing, for some of the things we hold precious will be attacked from the very outset. But it is written with a firm conviction that we must not be afraid to burn our sacred temples in order to discover what, if anything, remains. Indeed, perhaps it is not what remains after the fire has died that is true, but rather the fire itself. If so, then we need to take the words of Spanish anarchist Buenaventura Durruti seriously when he boldly declares: The only church that illuminates is a burning one. â–Ş 029
UP T NEX OFFERINGS RELEASE Oct 26. BREHM LECTURES Nov. 3 & 4, Payton Hall. “Art of Prophecy, Prophecy of Art” with Makoto Fujimura and Dr. Ellen Davis. ALT. X-MAS MARKET NOV. 18, 3-7 PM Fair trade & local items sale @ Barker Comm. & Catalyst asc-campuslife@fuller.edu for more info. MISSION WEEK JAN. 30 – FEB. 3, ’12 Events, workshops 7 booths The week of events, workshops, and booths designed to help students connect locally and globally. ASC is looking for students in all 3 schools to help plan. Stephanie at asccampuslife@fuller.edu.
FULLER STUDENT WIVES BIBLE STUDY Wed. 9-11a; Pasadena Presbyterian Church, (Colorado Blvd. & Madison Ave.). Childcare for 0-5 years. Thurs. 7-9p; Chang Commons (Fuller housing complex, N. Madison). No childcare provided. Lyndsay Piña 209.480.3609 or Janna McConnell 626.644.2942
CAMPUS BLOCK PARTY OCT. 14 Performance Schudule:
MUSIC
DANCE
Motown & Funk The Gillian Grannum Project 6:00pm Payton Stage 8:00pm Payton Stage
Contemporary Leanne Nettles 6:15pm SOP Patio 7:00pm Payton Stage 9:15pm Payton Stage
Opera Fred Davidson & Karen Johnson 7:15pm Payton Stage 8:30pm Prayer Rocks Stage
Liturgical Gospel ThruGuidance Ministries 9:15pm Payton Stage
Contemporary Soul & Folk Michael Wright & Band 6:30pm SOP Patio 7:45pm Prayer Rocks Stage
Chase, GodsDaughta 6:30pm Prayer Rocks Stage 9:00pm Payton Stage
Folk Meares 7:00pm Prayer Rocks Stage Acoustic Worship Ann Chen & Live Bones 8:30-10pm Prayer Chapel Electric Violin Michael Fox 7:00pm SOP Patio 9:30pm SOP Patio Choirs Korean Children’s Choir 6:45pm Payton Stage Fuller Vocal Ensemble 7:30pm Payton Stage OPEN MIC Fuller Arts Collective (FAC) Feature: Fox & Offerings preview 9:00p-10pm SOP Patio THEATER
To include your news in Up Next, email your even info to semi@fuller.edu!
Fuller Company 6:00pm Prayer Rocks Stage 7:30pm SOP Patio 9:00pm Prayer Rocks Stage
SPOKEN WORD
Hip Hop Showcase Sound Doctrine, Joey Manifesto, Godsdaughta, Chase 7:30pm Prayer Rocks Stage 8:45pm Payton Stage Art Performance (Painting) Rachel Rubenstein 3:30-10pm near Prayer Rocks Stage Salsa, Cumbia... Ashley Mcleery & Aretha Scruggs Salsa, Cumbia, Bachata Lessons & Dance 7:00p-8pm Barker Commons
OM FR S W NE S ID E U O T T HE FU LL ER BU BB LE
001
Stephen King has confirmed what has long been rumored: he is writing a sequel to The Shining. King read an excerpt from the work-in-progress at George Mason University in Virginia. In the original, son Danny Torrance and his imaginary friend Tony (“the little boy that lives in my mouth”) survive the events of the Overlook Hotel. In the new novel, Dr. Sleep, Danny is now an adult in a world with a roving tribe of vampires called The Tribe. Previously, there were rumors of King having written a Salem’s Lot sequel also involving a tribe of vampires. Source: Empire Magazine
002
On a recent visit to California, Pres. Obama was asked to raise taxes on the rich by Google’s first director of consumer marketing, Doug Edwards. At a town hall meeting before live cameras, Edwards said, “I would like very much to have the country to continue to invest in things like Pell grants and infrastructure and job training programs that made it possible to get where I am.” Edwards joins the list of the wealthy supporting Pres. Obama’s proposed minimum tax rate for anyone making more than $1 million a year. Warren Buffet, George Lucas, Howard Schultz and Mark Zuckerberg have each publicly lent their support to the proposal. A bipartisan budget deal is expected by late Nov. Source: The New York Times
003
Carlton Cuse, former Exec. Producer of Lost, is teaming with author/pastor Rob Bell for Stronger, a drama project with spiritual overtones recently sold to ABC Studios. Cuse and Bell are writing and producing the show together, which is expected to be semi-autobiographical for Bell as it will revolve around the spiritual journey a musician and teacher who becomes a benefactor and guide to others. Bell is a former musician who played with rock/gospel bands while a student at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, CA. Source: New York Magazine
004
According to the Pew Hispanic Center, the largest single group of poor children in America is now Hispanic. A study found that 37.3% of poor children in the U.S. are Hispanic, compared with 30.5% white and 26.6% black. These numbers, based on the 2010 Census, do not reflect the shift of Hispanics who identify themselves as Native Americans. According to the ‘10 Census, Hispanics identifying themselves as Native American have grown from 407,073 to 685,150. Source: CNN.com
CAREER CONFUSION ? Let Us Help You Find Direction Vocational Discernment and Career Services 626-584-5358, VDCS@fuller.edu Student Service Center lower level
Fuller Theological Seminary Vocational Discernment & Career Services www.fuller.edu/career