The third chapter of my book is called Spilled Milk. It’s all about the second beatitude: Blessed are those who mourn for they will be comforted.” I’ve really struggled with this chapter, mostly with how to begin, but I think I made progress today:
I was there when she came out with her mother’s eyes and my nose. Beautiful.
She was all swollen with deep creases at her joints and lots of places in between, segmented rolls of beautiful, looking more like a bundle of sausages in a diaper than a body and head, arms and legs. Beautiful dimpled knees crawled after the cats. Beautiful ruby lips cooed from the crib. Beautiful puffy fingers wrapped around my pinky.
Eventually, they played patty cake. Then they held crayons. They steered a tricycle across the street. Then they painted my finger nails and dug for doodle bugs. Beautiful.
And then they spilled a glass of milk one morning at breakfast. And everything changed.
She was three. I remember it well, from toaster to tears. I was cutting a freshly warmed waffled into choke-proof squares on the kitchen counter. Gabriella was coloring at the table, patiently waiting for breakfast as the sun slowly rose through the hackberry trees out back and threw shadows and light onto her picture.
We think she must have scooted in her chair to get out of the sun’s rays - we’re not sure - but milk was spilled.
“Dammit!” she yelled and collapsed into a tearful tantrum.
I laughed while Becky began interrogating and consoling Gabriella simultaneously. “You’re OK, Sweety. I’ll get you some more milk… Where’d you hear that word? Do you remember? Did -”
“You really need to watch your mouth around the kids,” I joked. “I know you get ticked off in traffic but…for the children, Becky.”
Even beauty is busted. I know this. But why cry over spilled milk?
Then I move on to answer that question.
I doubt I’ll be allowed to keep the word “Dammit” in there. Shame, really. What better way to argue for greater shock at the sight and sound of depravity than to create shock with depravity? At least that’s how my depraved brain is working today.
The book, by the way, is slated to release August 2008.
To read the post on chapter one of Ron Martoia’s Static click here. To buy the book and join the discussion click here.
On to chapter two.
Ron writes…
“The words we use have no raw definitions. Instead, from our life experiences we fill up “mental containers” - containers of understanding and meaning - that we call words. And because your life experience is different from my life experience, the connotations of words - our understanding of what those words mean - will vary from person to person.” (p. 12)
Ron also acknowledges that not only do we all define words differently to a degree, but we also use these words to communicate ideas we might not even fully understand or might understand incorrectly. So the problem of communicating our beliefs are many. Words we use don’t always mean to others what they mean to us and we may not have a good understanding (or correct understanding) of what we’re trying to communicate.
Ron says…
“I realized one day that I had come believe I was about 97 percent accurate in what I held to be doctrinally true. In other words, I acknowledged that I may be wrong about a few details, but certainly no more than about 3 percent...I was the product of the academy, where a premium was placed on being right, ready, and full of insight. At some level, I was merely reflecting the values commonly taught at Bible schools and seminaries around the globe. The problem with this sort of posture - this sort of “certainty” - is that over time it becomes impervious to change, fresh insight, or new understanding. Before long, we move from being learners (which is the real meaning of the Greek word for disciple in the New Testament) to becoming protectors - protectors of “what we have always believed.” (pp.13,14)
QUESTIONS: How do you process new ideas and insights? If someone speaks or writes an idea that is contrary to what you believe or just outside the scope of things you’ve thought about, how do you respond? How should we? What percentage of what you believe could you be wrong about?
Then Ron writes the most underline-worthy words in this book, for me…
All genuine learning requires a tentative disposition - tentative in the sense that I must hold open the possibility that the thoughts I have and the positions I hold may need to be adjusted, revised, or even discarded in favor of more complete understandings. (p.14)
This is difficult to me. I like certainty. I’m afraid of the “slippery slope” that leads from “tentative disposition” to “there is no absolute truth.”
QUESTIONS: What keeps us from living with a “tentative disposition?” How does having certainty benefit us and others we communicate with? How does it harm us and those we communicate with? Same questions with tentativeness. How’s that disposition benefit us and “them?” Are you convinced being more tentative and uncertain is the right way to go? Why?
Here’s the plan: We’re going to blog through Ron Martoia’s Static for a while. I’ll post something on one chapter every week, probably every weekend, as long as my schedule allows for it. You guys are invited to read, discuss, ask questions, disagree, agree etc.
This book is about gaining a more complete understanding about the Christian faith. And it’s about finding language and concepts that better communicate that faith.
What’s wrong with the language we use now? Some would say words like “repent” and “sin” and “Good News” have lost their meaning. Some would say what they mean doesn’t adequately communicate what the Christian faith was all about when the bible was written. Others would say these words are unattractive to those outside the Christian faith. Still others would say there’s nothing wrong with these words at all and, in fact, not using them is to be unbiblical and rewrite the Christian faith for easier sell to our modern consumer culture.
You can imagine that if this is what Static and our discussion here is about, there is bound to be disagreement from time to time. Passionate disagreement. All I ask is that we all think and pray before posting, that we’re kind to one another at all times, and that we put constructive discourse above winning. Let’s get started…
CHAPTER ONE: PHEIDIPPIDES WAS A WIMP
In this first chapter Ron introduces the two characters Phil and Jess, a husband and wife who are trying to “witness” to Phil’s co-worker Marty and having a hard time with it. This book is their ongoing conversation with Ron about what Christianity really is and what Marty really needs to hear from Phil and Jess. This is a trendy writing device these days in certain circles: Conversation as a means of teaching. QUESTION: Was eavesdropping on Ron’s conversation with Jess and Phil an effective way to communicate these ides to you or would you rather him just tell you what he knows and leave Jess and Phil out of it?
SNIPPETS:
“In the stories of Jesus’ life, the salvation parts-all of them-are answers to direct questions,” I said. “People ask Jesus or a disciple to them about salvation, and they get an honest answer. But if salvation is the ‘good news’ that we read about, then why do people have to drag it out of Jesus and the disciples? Or look at Acts 16:17, NLT. In that account, a girl is tagging along behind Paul and Silas, and she is shouting, ‘These men are servants of the Most High God, and they have come to tell you how to be saved.’ But Paul, instead of saying, ‘Uh-huh-sing it , sister; we got the power,’ turns around and commands an evil spirit to leave the girl. So, apparently, Paul recognizes that emphasizing salvation is a misdirection-not to mention an irritant. Which it is.” p.5 QUESTION: When you read these words for the first time what was your inner monologue? Did you immediately form an opinion? What was it?
I was part of the church. I was studying Scripture. I thought I knew it all. But when I talked to people outside the Christian bubble, people who didn’t believe or who were searching for a deeper spirituality, I hit a brick wall every time… When you hit so many brick walls, eventually you’ve got to question whether you truly understand the message yourself - or whether you really know how to communicate it. p.9 QUESTIONS: Has this been your experience - “hitting brick walls” when you talk about what you believe with people who don’t believe the same things? And, if so, have you questioned whether you understand “the message” correctly? Or do you more often question whether you’re communicating the right message in the wrong way, or just poorly? Or do these questions presume too much - you don’t actually think much about what “the message” is or communicate it to anyone? If we’re ineffective in communicating what we believe (ineffective in that others don’t listen or come to believe as we do) does that necessarily mean we misunderstand the message or communicate it poorly? Does less than stellar “results” necessarily mean there’s a problem with our understanding or our communicating?
We’re close on this book deal thing. The deal memo is being turned into an actual contract. The publisher has been a breeze to work with (much easier than record label folks...geez) and we’ve come up with contract terms that work for all of us. Now, the final draft is being created - all the withertos and beforementioneds are being checked - and by the end of this week (we all hope) we’ll have something for me and them to sign.
And then I have to write a book I guess.
Yea, I’m pretty sure that’s in the contract somewhere.
Just before signing a contract with a record label or a publishing company you receive a “deal memo.” It’s a one page document listing the key points to be agree upon. If I agree with those points I sign it, fax it over, and it becomes the foundation for the contract which the legal department then draws up for me to sign.
The book deal memo arrived yesterday. In it is stuff like…
A book summary.
Editor’s name.
Publication Date (August 1, 2008)
The amount of the advance (money paid upfront) and the schedule of payment after that.
Royalty rate.
The rate at which the author can purchase the book to resell.
The dimensions of the book and any other production peculiarities - paper type, for instance.
Word count and the date the manuscript is to be turned in.
All that’s agreed upon. So I’m signing, faxing over, and waiting for “legal” to do their thing.
