Learning from Tim Tebow

      Part of it is that some American habits annoy Canadians. The behaviour of some celebrities and politicians south of the border seems, to those north of it, well, a little impolite. A little too much self-promotion, attention seeking, and Hey-look-how-great-I-am. We like Donald Trump, but like him even better for living in New York rather than London, Canada, and we get nervous seeing U. S. soldiers behave like cowboys when they invade Middle Eastern countries.
      This is probably part of the reason Canadian commentators have been discussing Tim Tebow. He's become famous for his public quoting of the Bible, his calling on God, and his public prayers. When he isn't quarterbacking - and doing a mediocre job of it, which is strengthening the annoyance factor - he's talking about God at news conferences, and praying in the football field. Images of him kneeling on the sidelines while his Denver Broncos teammates celebrated have gone viral. His name has become a verb meaning, “To get down on a knee and start praying, even if everyone else around you is doing something completely different.” Pictures of imitators are all over the web.
      Some people see Tebow's displays of prayer as an interesting curiousity. Others, as an affirmation of what they believe. Still others see it as a validation of America as a Christian nation. A few are offended. Sportscasters appear glad to see Tebow's football field faith as a great way to raise NFL tv ratings.
By way of comparison, most Canadians would not like to see Sidney Crosby on his knees after every goal; if he is thankful to God for each one, most want him to express that in some other way. Besides, if he were to get on his knees after every goal, it could seriously hold up the game.
      Athletes, mostly American, praying on fields are a common sight. Their doing this publicly is not only a function of their personal faith - Tebow, for example, is the son of Christian missionaries; it is also attributable to the fact that American culture promotes the public expression of the individual. Tebow is expressing, in an American-appropriate big way, his individuality.
      All that being said though, perhaps prayer on the athletic field is completely understandable for another reason. Imagine being adored by millions of fans. Five thousand or fifty thousand of them might be packed into a stadium where they (or about half of them) will do all they can to cheer you on. Imagine being part of a billion dollar spectacle that's streaming live onto screens on several continents. Including onto computer displays in Fanshawe College residences and the occasional study carrel.
      It would be perfectly normal to feel overwhelmed with awe that you, yes you, are experiencing this rare and privileged moment. In fact, all over the planet parents are making sacrifices, and young athletes are practicing every day, in pursuit of such experiences. Not to mention the money that comes with them.
      Perhaps every athletic match should begin with a brief public prayer of thanks that God has arranged his world in a way to make these spectacular experiences happen with amazing frequency in today's world. That spectators can come together to enjoy the game is truly something for which one can give thanks. Even experienced vicariously, a hockey game or a football match can be incredible.
      I doubt that such prayers are going to be made over the sound systems in our arenas anytime soon. For the time being (in good Canadian fashion) we'll have to say them silently. And who knows, but doing that might help us thank God for a few other things too. And that would not be a bad thing.

Pastor Nadarkhani and Religious Freedom

        In the late 1980s when I was still a seminary student I met Steve. Steve was from Egypt, and he told me how he had converted from the Islamic faith of his family to Christianity. I was very interested in his personal journey and asked him to tell me more. At one point, however, I had to stop him and ask if I had heard him correctly. Yes I had. He said that if he returned to Egypt, even for a short time to visit his family, his brothers would likely try to kill him. This was the first time I had come into direct contact with someone who endured death threats for his or her faith.
        It would not be my last. Later in London I met a family who had arrived as refugees from Southern Sudan and the civil war that had been boiling there for decades. I learned that one of the most persistent dynamics in that war was that the Sudanese people to the north regard the Christianity of those in the south as inferior to Islam. Funda and his family fled, and with the help of the United Nations, made their way to London. Here, as Christian refugees (along with Muslim refugees), they were free to put into practice their understandings of God and faith.
        This is not to say that all Muslims are antagonistic to Christians. That is certainly not the case. However, we need to recognize the painful struggle for the freedom of non-Muslims that is taking place in countries where Islam is prevalent and exerts strong influence on the government.
        A more recent victim of those who oppress others because they reject Islam for Christianity is Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. Today Christians around the world are praying for his release from prison in Iran. And the United Nations as well as U.S. President Obama have issued public statements in his support.
        Nadarkhani was first imprisoned for two weeks in Iran in 2006. The charges? Apostasy (renouncing Islam) and evangelising Muslims (trying to persuade them to become Christians). Then, in 2009 he learned that the reading of the Qur'an was now required for all students in school. Having children in school himself, Nadarkhani protested. In October of that year he was called before a tribunal on the charge of "protesting."
        The next year his wife, Fatemeh Pasandideh, was arrested - also for apostasy - and sentenced to life imprisonment. She was released after four months of isolation from her family. According BosNewsLife the children may be taken away to be raised as Muslims (a parallel to the way the Canadian government used to take Native children away and raise them in residential schools).
        Around the same time in 2010 the pastor himself was again arrested for apostasy and evangelism. This time he was sentenced to death by hanging. For about a year now there has been a lot of legal wrangling about procedural issues. In the meantime Nadarkhani has been under constant pressure to renounce his Christianity - which would mean escaping the death sentence. He has not recanted.
        Likely the Iranian government does not want to appear hostile to religious freedom. It has signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In the light of this agreement the U.N. Commission on International Religious Freedom has declared the legal proceedings against Nadarkhani a "sham."
        One apparent scheme that Iranian authorities have hatched to get out from under the scrutiny of agencies protecting religious freedom is to change the charges against Pastor Nadarkhani. The Iranian state media last month began saying that his death sentence is not for apostasy, but for rape and extortion.
        But wait, it gets better. Perhaps fearing that the rape and extortion shtick won't work, Gholamali Rezvani, the Gilan Provincial Political Security Deputy stated, according to Wikipedia,
        “Youcef Nadarkhani has security crimes and he had set up a house of corruption. ... Nobody is
        executed in our regime for choosing a religion, but he is a Zionist who has security crimes.”

        A little more than a month ago British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, paid "tribute to the courage shown by Pastor Nadarkhani." He called for the authorities in Iran to immediately overturn his sentence.
        Pastor Nadarkhani is one of many around the planet who are risking everything in order to express their understandings of God and faith. Someday their courage may be celebrated in the same way that many celebrate rights pioneers such as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. For now prayer for Nadarkhani will continue along with efforts of rights advocates. Hopefully we will hear of his release soon. That will be a good day, not only for him, but for all people, including the people of Iran.

War, Pacifism, and a Third Alternative

        James Loney sees war as an institution, obscene and perverse. It sweeps up people as perpetrators and as victims. Loney is a peace activist who was captured and held in Iraq in 2005. He and three others were abducted in Baghdad during the time they were meeting with Muslim leaders in the city. His captors identified themselves as the Swords of Righteousness Brigade. One of the four hostages, Tom Fox, was eventually taken away, and his bullet-riddled body was found later dumped in the street. Loney shares his story of being a hostage in the book, Captivity: 118 Days in Iraq and the Struggle for a World Without War (Random House, 2011).
        War is an awful thing. Some say it brings out the best in people, especially courage. But it also brings out the worst. The Canadians who survived Vimy Ridge during World War One, for example, did so using poison gas, bayonets, shelling, bullets, underground explosions, tanks, and other technologies designed to maim the enemy to death. All sides in war commit acts of savagery. Our awareness of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is a recognition that those who commit them often reenter society broken.
        From Loney's book we see the horror experienced by the citizens of Iraq during the U.S. led invasion. '"There will not be a safe place in Baghdad," a Pentagon official said.... The bombs and missiles fell day and night, fifty thousand strikes in thirty days. ...Chaos followed shock and awe. After securing the Ministry of Oil and the Ministry of Interior, the U.S. stood by and watched as libraries, hospitals, schools and every government building was looted and burned.'
        Of course, there's an alternative to war: Pacifism. In principle Pacifism opens the way for the end of all war. It may not have many takers, but it has a lot of lookers. And, it would work, obviously, if there were enough takers.
        But many have difficulty with Pacifism because it looks like simple passivity. It doesn't seem right that some just stand aside while others defend them from aggressors. As long as people or countries insist on getting their way through violence, Pacifism doesn't seem to be an adequate response.
        Loney, a Catholic, a Canadian and a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT), offers a third alternative. The mission statement of CPT reads in part, "Christian Peacemaker Teams offers an organized, nonviolent alternative to war and other forms of lethal inter-group conflict. CPT provides organizational support to persons committed to faith-based nonviolent alternatives in situations where lethal conflict is an immediate reality or is supported by public policy. CPT seeks to enlist the response of the whole church in conscientious objection to war, and in the development of non-violent institutions, skills and training for intervention in conflict situations."
        The organization provides the means for Christians to place themselves in situations of potential and real conflict in order to advocate for peace and for potential victims. Today Peacemaker teams are active in Palestine, Colombia, Iraq and other locations. On some occasions its members have been abused or killed.
        This is a far cry from passive resistance to war. It is an active, but nevertheless non-violent, response to the "institution" of war, one that does not leave volunteers free from risk, but places them in the thick of it.
        Canadians, it seems, are open to the values expressed by CPT. We prefer working with human rights and development intitiatives to going to war. We would rather set up schools than missile sites in Afghanistan.
        Remembrance Day is here again. The day can be used by some to unquestioningly glorify war and those who perish in it. But it's also an opportunity to consider an alternative. As Jean Vanier says about Loney's book, "[It] is a story of hope. In a world of violence there are still many men and women who believe in working for peace... [They] risk following Jesus to the very end. May many be inspired by this story to be peacemakers not just in Iraq but where we are in our everyday lives."

What's Jesus Got To Do with the Future?

        Some say that the world would be a better place if Jesus were in it just a little more. That's a way of saying that life for most people could be better if more people shared and lived the Christian faith.
        Is that true? Some say that we can get along better without Jesus or any suggestions of God. There is a belief that religion is dangerous. According to some authors and bloggers, any God-talk is a danger because it generates fanatical attitudes that lead very quickly to acts of violence against others. If you believe God is on your side, then others could end up on the receiving end of your Inquisition or Islamic Jihad.
        On another level there is the feeling that the world is improving without any involvement of God, or belief in a god if there is none. The prosperity we enjoy appears to come through secular economic and political systems that have jettisoned all connections with religious institutions. Without praying, it seems, we are able to overthrow and kill dictators. The Arab Spring, current student uprisings and the Occupy Movement might be a quest that is more about universal human aspirations toward justice and freedom and a whole lot less about religion - in spite of the apparent revival of Islamic politics and Sharia Law where the Arab Spring continues.
        I don't want to pose the question, "What does religion have to do with the future?" because that immediately begs the question, "Which religion?" They are definitely all not "basically the same," as we are so often told. The question has to be much more specific. "What does Mohammed have to do with the future?" or "What does the Buddha have to do with it?"
        I'm limiting my question to this: "What does Jesus Christ have to do with the improvement of our lives for the future, in this world?"
        The response some Christians have to this question can be disappointing. Some believers feel that Jesus' main plan is to take his followers away from this earth to heaven and that ultimately, heaven is the fitting home of those who believe in him. If that's true this world doesn't have much value and its improvement is not a great priority. This is the kind of view you get, for example, in the very popular Left Behind book series.
        Other Christians, especially in the later nineteenth and earlier twentieth centuries used to take the view that such interventions seemed too crude for God and for Jesus. They surmised that Jesus is intervening in a more sophisticated sense: through human evolution of all kinds he is helping the world reach utopia. Two barbaric world wars cut away this understanding - though some religious optimists failed to catch on.
        What if, though, the Bible's account of Jesus suggests something different? That he is indeed present in some way, especially through his people and his Spirit; but that he is in another sense absent and preparing to come back. His return will not be for the purpose of lifting his own to heaven, but for the purpose of welcoming heaven back into our world and into our lives. He will come put all things right. Judgement will happen. But God's judgement in the Bible is always a good thing. It is a judgement in favour of the oppressed and marginalized and a judgement against oppressors of all kinds.
        This would mean that his people should be preparing for his return by thinking and acting in hope. Preparing for him does not mean withdrawing into a life of only prayer and devotion waiting for his return. Rather it means getting your hands dirty; it means putting your feet on the ground, looking for ways to demonstrate compassion towards people in trouble right where you are; it means working for justice and fairness in every way that is available to you; it means supporting others who may not share faith in Jesus, but are also on a quest for a world that is more just than it is.
        Jesus Christ will return. And in the meantime, his people can be a signpost of hope in a world that is difficult to negotiate. God cares, and the evils that currently trouble all of us will one day, suddenly, fade to black. When he comes back heaven's light, grace and redemption will dramatically fill this world, our planetary home.

"It Doesn't Cost Anything To Love Our People"

        The stories were heartbreaking, and more about them in a moment. Last week I attended a hearing of Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) at Indian Brook, NS. The event took place not far from the very residential school that some of the survivors at the meeting were once forced to attend.
        With seven public hearings scheduled across Canada and a $60 million budget, the TRC is a national listening ear. It is mandated to provide an inclusive, victim-sensitive, and culturally appropriate setting for aboriginal people to share their experiences of the residential schools.
        Survivors may tell their stories publicly or in private meeting rooms. They are not cross-examined. Their stories are only heard and recorded. The purpose of the hearings is to listen to "your truth," as Commissioner Marie Wilson put it. The process is intended to help government, churches, and indigenous communities come to terms with the tragedy of Canada's residential schools.
        The survivors of the schools are aging so that increasingly their children are called upon to recall the suffering of their parents. Churches ran the schools for the government - implementing the government's policy of eradicating aboriginal cultures. Children, as young as four years old, were forcibly taken from their homes and placed in the schools. An organizer told me that even though the schools might be located only a few blocks from the homes of aboriginal families, family contact was forbidden for months in a row.
        I heard stories of survivors being cruelly strapped for running away, for bed-wetting, and for even accidentally letting any Aboriginal word - even a "thank-you" - slip from their mouths. The children of survivors shared how their parents physically abused them because the parents had learned that beating is the main form of discipline. Some shared that the standing of parents and elders was destroyed by the schools. Others told about their long-term abuse of alcohol and drugs as a way to escape school memories.
        One man reflected on the possibility of forgiveness, and how difficult it is to forgive the "black robes," the church, the government, the media, and the agencies that regulate compensation payments. "The black robes were the instruments of the government to destroy us," were his words.
        There was the gut-wrenching story of a sister who was forbidden from visiting her brother in the school. She risked a great deal to sneak over to him. I heard a man tell the story, broadcast later that day, of how his hands were so badly swollen from strapping that his cousin had to feed him that evening.
        One woman shared how the residential school was an evil presence. She was one of the very last residents of her school. On the day she finally left, a sister (a teacher) called out, "Wait, you forgot something," and brought out her Bible. She took the Bible from the sister's hands and threw it away. It seems that, as one survivor from PE said, "God too was a victim of the residential schools."
        Throughout the day I began to realize that the survivors who spoke are not just victims. After all they don't call themselves that. Their very presence at the hearing was a presence of courage. And a presence of hope. Otherwise, why bother?
        A very hopeful comment was one I heard later that afternoon. It came from a survivor who had become a social worker and now uses her sensitivities to help families and youth on the reserve. She chided aboriginal leaders who don't listen to survivors and their children. She called on them to love their struggling people. "Help will in the end not come from the government. It must come from our own people. It doesn't cost anything to love, to care, to pray for others, to treat them as human beings. It doesn't cost anything to love our people."
        When she finished I realized that this was the note on which I wanted to leave; I picked up my things and walked to the exit.

Israel and the Parable of the Good Palestinian

        In the 1930s and '40s Jews were horribly persecuted. Anti-Semitism of course thrived in Nazi Germany. But it was also alive, in (usually) less extreme forms, in the rest of Europe, in the United States, and yes, in Canada.
        In the aftermath of World War II, much of the world recognized Jews as an oppressed people, marginalized, victimized, and hounded almost to extinction. And when, through their own fierce determination, they began to gather in Palestine and press for recognition as the legitimate state of Israel, the United Nations gave it to them. At the same time, the U. N. also envisioned a Palestinian state.
        Perhaps other reasons for the recognition of Israel determined that outcome. Historians have pointed out that the U. S. wanted an ally in the Middle East, in order to, among other things, encircle the post war threat of the then communist Soviet Union.
        Nevertheless, widespread sympathy for Jews no doubt was a key factor. Some have argued that the moral failure of the West to honour Jews over the centuries has lead, not only to its little-questioned approval of Israeli statehood. It has also made it impossible for Western countries to seriously challenge the way Israel has forced non-Israelis to either accept Israeli political authority or leave.
        Twenty centuries ago, a young Jew told a story, the "Parable of the Good Samaritan." In the story, Jesus told of a Samaritan man who stops to give first aid, and then transportation and housing, to a Jew who had been robbed and left to die on a dangerous stretch of road.
        In those days, Jews living in the south of Israel looked down on their Samaritan neighbours to the north. They saw Samaritans as religiously unclean and a threat to the proper life Jews were to live. Samaritans were the "other", outcasts who did not deserve compassion from well-established and respectable Jews of that time. And yet, in the story, this "good Samaritan" had compassion on a Jew.
        The Parable of the Good Samaritan forced upon many of the Jewish leaders of the day disturbing questions - questions about their own righteousness, and their inability to see the Samaritan people as human beings who could also respond appropriately to God, as people who could be compassionate, and who would, in turn, deserve recognition and compassion from Jews.
        In an online CNN post, Carl Madearis suggests that if Jesus were alive today and living in Israel, he would not tell the Parable of the Good Samaritan. He would tell the Parable of the Good Palestinian. Thinking about this I wonder if he would be crucified for it. Likely. While countless Jews of Jesus' time embraced him and began the Christian movement, some crucified him for telling a story that questioned their treatment of their neighbours.

Killer Fuel for Partying Students

        It's one thing to be served a glass of wine at home with your family. It is one thing to have a pint or two with friends in a pub. However, it is a quite different thing to use alcohol as party fuel.
        Yet, that's what countless young Canadians do each year. The results can be, well, about the worst imaginable. According to a recent article in the Winnipeg Free Press, 28 year-old Dawn Huston may never walk again. There are many other things she may never do. One night in February, 2010, after liquor shots and beers with friends, she got into a car. To date that's the last time she walked. The driver has since admitted to having had twice the legal limit of alcohol in her blood as she got behind the wheel. She missed a stop sign, and the resulting crash broke Huston's neck.
        At Nova Scotia's Acadia University, not far from where I live, a first-year student arrived from Alberta earlier this September. Within days he was dead. The parents did not want his name published, so you will not see it here. What was not hidden from the media, however, was the fact that he died from alcohol. Suddenly, the dangers of "high risk drinking" and "drinking games" were out there for all to see.
        There's more. An online Canadian Broadcasting Corporation article discusses the findings of a 2004 survey taken by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto. It found that 32 per cent of university undergraduates drank at a dangerous level. "Ten per cent of those surveyed reported having experienced alcohol-related assault, 9.8 per cent reported alcohol-related sexual harassment and 14.1 per cent reported having unplanned sexual relations because of being inebriated."
        Students tell anecdotes about streets littered with broken glass near Queens University, revellers urinating on front yards, and the night air filled with profanity. Another student observes that his friends get drunk and then get sick. One follows the other. And alcohol-driven misbehaviour by Fanshawe College and University of Western Ontario students in London got a lot of air time back in 2008. The local police created project LEARN to "clamp down" on drunk students.
        So, two things. First, as Spiderman says somewhere, "You always have a choice." We always have a choice about whether to commit to a night of binge drinking. We can say either yes or no to driving drunk or getting into a car with a driver who is probably over the limit. Normally the person most responsible for what happens to me is me. And the person most responsible for what happens to you is you.
        Second, all that being said, we make it hard for many to say yes to drunk-free student days. Ads glamorizing alcohol fill our video screens and print media. This is not accidental. It is planned manipulation. Beer and liquor manufacturers stand to make a lot of money for their share-holders by suggesting to students that they will be more attractive after a few drinks. I don't know. The girl at the other end of the bar may look more attractive after you have had a few shots. But are you sure that you look all that much better to her just because you've dramatically raised your blood-alcohol content?
        Nevertheless, the ads keep doing their work. Beer trucks unload their product on campuses across North America, and if they can get permission, stay visible during orientation festivities in all their chrome-encrusted glory. Movies glamorizing drink and the stupid behaviour that goes with it are imprinted on our memories (by our choice). The peer pressure to drink is,ubiquitous, everywhere. And instructions for drinking games are available to all online.

* * *

The death at Acadia University can, perhaps, do some good. It can help colleges, universities, and the student unions back away from partnering with beer and alcohol companies which have absolutely no ability to help schools fulfill their mission, that is to educate. Alcohol does not make us smart or informed. It makes us dull - and stupid if it draws us from class work. Further, this student's death can make us aware of the dangers of peer pressure when "friends" tell us that we have to drink in order be accepted.
        Binge drinking? Frequent visits to the bar? Loading up the dorm room fridge with booze? Pre-party shots? Think again. The life you save may be your friend's, or yours. The education you save may help you. And the habits you learn might just make the difference between a life lived well and one slip-sliding over the edge of failure.

The Politics of Love: Canadian Leader Jack Layton - The Greatest is Love

        By the time you read this, Jack Layton's funeral in Toronto will already have taken place.  But hopefully, some of what he valued will not be forgotten.

        Jack Layton was the leader the opposition in the Canadian federal political arena.  Most Canadians did not vote for Layton and his New Democratic Party  (NDP) during the recent federal election.  Many who would otherwise not want to speak publicly in favour of him or the party, however, had nothing but words of praise when the country learned of his death.  Former Conservative Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney said, "He was trustworthy like his dad..."  Interim Liberal leader, Bob Rae, said, "Mr. Layton showed tremendous class and quality with his determination to go ahead despite the news."   Prime Minister Harper, never a fan of the NDP, not only praised Layton, but provided a state funeral for him, an honour never before given to a parliamentary opposition leader, never mind one who has been in that role for only a few months.
        Should all this praise coming from former enemies and recent political rivals be labelled hypocrisy?  Perhaps for a few that's what it is.  There may be leaders who don't mind taking advantage of an opportunity to praise someone only because everyone else is doing the same, and not to join might hurt the chances of future political success.  In that case, we could still take some small comfort in what someone once cynically said:  "Hypocrisy is the compliment vice pays to virtue."
        However, I think, most did not knowingly seek be hypocrites when they spoke of Jack Layton.  Rather, Canadians everywhere seemed to sense that Layton's death was an opportunity to tap into something deeper - and something that increasingly seems necessary for a civil society:  Love. 
        Layton addressed his parting letter not only to his party but to all Canadians.  And it ends with a call to love. 
        The letter is not free of Layton's loyalty to the NDP.  But through it flow deeper currents.  Some of them are obvious, for example, the value placed on young people, on the fight against climate change, and the shaping of an economy that is fair for all, especially the less fortunate.  Also, inherent in the letter is a valuing of intellectual life:  the letter is thoughtful and reasoned, a breath of fresh air to any who feel overwhelmed by superficial commentary and simplistic slogans.  The letter celebrates the pursuit of positive change.  The letter is respectful of its readers, assuming that we have it in us to build a country that all can call home.
        And at its end the letter contains a call to illuminate our world with, first of all, love.   "My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic."
        To many, the call to love, hope and optimism may have a familiar ring.  Haven't we heard something like that elsewhere?  In the end, Layton's closing words echo those of the Apostle Paul, St. Paul of the Christian tradition.  At one point Paul wrote about the gifts of the Spirit of God.  "And now, these three remain, faith, hope and love; but the greatest of these is love."  Layton, calling Canadians to love.  Not a bad final word.  

The U2 Church

        One of the nice moments for me at the U2 concert this past July in Toronto was running into John. Although we were both 2,000 kilometers from our home in Nova Scotia, Canada, there he was, just a few feet over. I knew he'd be there, but without having planned an exact rendezvous, I was surprised to wind up almost next to him.
        Later, John texted that U2 concerts for him are church. I've been thinking about his comment and his connecting U2 with the Christian tradition. Having followed the band off and on for some time, I can guess five reasons for seeing the band and the church as having some things in common: community; the sacred world; the value of each person; the word; the journey.
        Community. Christians value their communities. U2 fans are a tribe, a community, each person committed, some very strongly, to the story and the music of U2. The person in a 60,000 seat venue next to you might be a stranger, but not a complete one. You are both there for the same reason.
        The sacred world. In Christian worship people are encouraged to see the world as a sacred place of beauty. During the 360 Tour, U2 had audiences listening to astronaut Mark E. Kelly speaking from the International Space Station. From his vantage point, he was able to see our planetary home, all of it. He suspended paper cut outs of the words "It's a beautiful day" and recited the lyrics to the song of that name.
        Christians are taught that all persons are inherently valued - that God has created all persons as sacred, made to reflect his glory. This is foundational to the human rights tradition around the world. For the 360 Tour, Bishop Desmond Tutu, international human rights activist, introduced (on video) the song, "One." And Burmese political activist, Aung San See Kyi introduced (also on video) "Scarlet." Bono compared her to another champion of human rights, Nelson Mandela.
        The Word. This probably won't come as a surprise to most U2 followers, but the band has spun lyrics out of many Bible stories, themes and phrases. Two quick examples: the title of the song, "Rejoice" - and its message - come straight from the fourth chapter of Philippians; the story in "Until the End of the World" is that of Judas who betrayed Jesus.
        The Journey. Finally, consider the song "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For." There are probably a number of ways to experience it. But I think the one that makes the most sense is as an affirmation that life is a spiritual journey. In the Christian understanding, there is a tension between what is affirmed and what is yet to come. Jesus Christ is affirmed as creator and restorer. On the other hand, there is a longing for what is still to come - a world of healing, justice, love and unity, the "kingdom come" when "all the colours will bleed into one." God calls all persons to journey towards this new day, to await its dawning and act in hope while the journey lasts. This longing, this hope, continues to haunt the music of U2, and it is what more than anything else can make your heart stop to hear their songs.