Answers to Paul's interview questions:

1. Which religious rituals were emphasized while we were growing up?

The emphasis growing up was on external religious rituals-- doing things that seemed meaningless because God was apparently pleased by them. I knew the "communion part" of church by heart by age 12. During church school, we did things like memorize the Lord's Prayer rather than discuss our personal experiences with God. On a confirmation trip, one boy expressed doubt in God, but the leaders didn't really care. As long as we engaged in the proper confirmation process and rituals, their work with us was done.

I was hungry for God at a young age, but that hunger was not satiated. I was inundated with liturgy when I didn't understand the purpose of it. Although I liked the idea of God, I disliked church. It was boring and repetitive. None of it was internal or personal, and I lived as an internal and personal person in an internal and personal world. The religious rituals of childhood didn't match up with the notion of a contemporary, meaningful faith.


2. Explain your religious change from the Episcopal church to a more Evangelical, modern church.

I never was satisfied in the Episcopal church. The one thing that really connected with me is the message I got at Spring Hill. It was like Christianity without strings. God loved me so much He went to the cross and back for me. I could get excited and passionate about a message like that. I got a "cool" Bible (paraphrased and w/ teen commentary). I met people who really wanted to live this thing out. I met people who gave their lives to the cause of the Gospel. In my heart, I knew that if God was real, He wanted all of me-- He was my purpose for life. If I really took this message seriously, I would have to give my entire life-- past, present, and future-- to Him... because at the end, God is it. God is ALL that matters.

The culturally savvy, passion-driven, spirit-filled counselors at Spring Hill really helped me form a new view of Christianity. I returned to the Episcopal church hoping to zap some passion through those stained glass walls, but the people I talked with there, honestly, were interested more in tradition than passion.

Over the years, I have come to a realization of my priorities: I look for churches that love God-- the members read their Bibles, they preach the Word, they advocate service and missions, they care about the poor, the oppressed, and they want to do community with one another. They want to follow Jesus with their hearts and lives. These people are often called "evangelicals," but I don't like that term (more about that in #3).

I would never consider myself an "Episcopal" partly because I believe they are doing the opposite things a church should be doing (Episcopal church= theologically liberal and liturgically conservative, I believe we should be liturgically liberal and theologically conservative). The Episcopal church has recently advocated gay marriage, which is a liberal shift. Although I am not sold either way on the gay marriage thing, that is a sign of a liberal interpretation of the Bible (not taking the words of the Bible as literal). Evangelicals typically have inerrant/ infallible views of the Bible and thus frown upon homosexuality. The Episcopal church is thus theologically liberal, denouncing core tenants of Christianity such as the divinity of Jesus, the inspiration of Scripture, etc. They are also conservative liturgically, seeing tradition as one leg of the "3 legged stool" that characterizes Episcopalianism. Evangelicals, on the other hand, are more willing to get rid of tradition, especially if it provides a stumbling block for people coming to Christ.

Also, the Episcopal church is a denomination, and I see denominations to be lingering aspects of the past. Denominations are tied to institutions, often institutions that are slow to change and veering far away from the Gospel.


3.Explain your brand of Evangelical type Christianity and where it fits into today's society (i.e. how it's similar/ different to Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Rob Bell or others)

Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and other members of the "Christian conservatives" are a vocal but geographically isolated minority of evangelical Christians. They are vocal in southern states and are a very, very small minority of Protestants/ evangelicals.

I believe in the separation of church and state. I laugh at the idea of Jesus hating gays or being Republican. Such statements are utterly absurd. Many current evangelicals are reacting against the recently vocal conservative Christians, such as Greg Boyd (Myth of a Christian Nation), Rob Bell (Jesus Wants to Save Christians), and Shane Claiborne. They are taking initiatives to help the poor and oppressed, be pro-life in EVERY sense of the word (anti-war AND anti-abortion), and discuss the evils of power. I don't necessarily agree with everything these pastors/ theologians are saying, but it is a needed complement to the vocal Falwell and crowd.

Jesus called people to love God and love people. As is implied in the term "evangelical," I believe in spreading the Good News. Although this analogy is cheesy, if I had the best present ever and I wanted to hide it from people, wouldn't I be mean? Jesus is the best present to come to humanity, and I would be selfish if I concealed it from people because I was too afraid of getting judged. Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life... that is, THE way, THE truth, and THE life. Jesus is truth embodied. Jesus is life embodied. Any healing or life is a cause and result of Him.

Evangelism doesn't mean handing out Bible tracts and yelling at people on the diag. It means investing in people personally, really caring about how they're doing and feeling. It means caring about their emotional, physical, mental, and most of all spiritual, well-being. Evangelism means working in a soup kitchen AND having coffee with people to discuss God. It is doing whatever possible to spread the Kingdom of God, the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I also believe that every Christian needs a personal relationship with Jesus Christ-- a vibrant faith that includes some kind of prayer (but not like, "thou art God"... more like, "hey God"), learning more about Him (Bible study), and community with other believers (involvement in some kind of church entity).

My favorite theologians/ pastors are: Francis Chan (Cornerstone Church in Simi Valley, CA), Craig Groeschel (Lifechurch.tv in Oklahoma), Rick Warren (Saddleback Church in CA), John Ortberg (Menlo Park Presbyterian Church in CA- the church Condaleeza Rice attends), Tim Keller (Redeemer Presbyterian Church), Rob Bell (Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, MI), and Mark Driscoll (Mars Hill Church in Seattle, WA).

I like the Willow Creek movement (Willow Creek Community Church in IL and Heartland CC in Rockford, IL). I am very supportive of most churches that preach the Word, love others, are nondenominational, have vibrant Bible study and life group opportunities, and are culturally relevant but doctrinally sound.

4. How has being a woman affected your seeking of a job in the field of Christianity?

Honestly, I tend to gravitate toward churches that advocate traditional gender roles, and that has impacted the careers I would strive for... to an extent. If I really felt God calling me to pastoral work, I would be in a much tougher place-- I would either have to pick a denomination (which I would NOT want to do) or go to the few megachurches (Willow Creek churches) that believe in gender equality (egalitarianism). I think someday the gender role movement in evangelical churches will dissipate, but for right now, I am choosing to remain silent on this subject. Gender issues are secondary to the Gospel. I do not pick churches based on gender roles-- I pick churches based on how they relate to the GOSPEL. That is #1! I think God is calling me to thrive and remain in the framework of a church that is potentially more conservative than I am on gender roles. At the moment, that's okay with me.


5. Has coming from a religiously diverse background shaped your life and religion? If so, how?

As a result of my Jewish relatives, I identify with cultural aspects of Judaism. None of our Jewish relatives are devout; they practice only in the cultural rituals of Judaism (high holidays, bar mitzvahs, Jewish friends, Jewish food, Jewish books, Jewish lectures, etc.). Theologically, however, they are mostly agnostic and humanistic.

On the other side of the family, it is ironically quite similar. People mostly go through the external rituals of liturgy, concerts, services, Confirmation, baby baptism, etc., but that is mostly it. If you talk to them, they are theologically much more liberal... and end up confessing doubt and sounding a lot like our humanistic Jewish relatives.

There have been some changes since my mom, Jacob, Anne and her family, and I have become more evangelical and personal about the matters of faith, which I see as very positive.

My "religiously diverse" background has shaped my reluctance of externally based religion. If external religious rituals are done in a social, almost superstitious manner, it does nothing for personal piety. In reality, God does not want chants and luekwarm prayers. He wants our HEARTS. I have learned to disdain meaningless "religion," filled with rules on how to please God. Christianity is a RELATIONSHIP with the Lord- it's all about God coming to us.

If religious rituals, whether Episcopalian reformed Jewish or humanistic Jewish, are all pointless if not meant to impact someone personally, if not done to connect the person with God.

Growing up with so much agnosticism, I have also grown sensitive to the doubts many people face in regards to Christianity. That inspired me to learn more about my own faith and formulate responses to people when faced with doubt. I also have more of a heart to spread the Gospel to people. There is no real hope apart from Christ, and I believe God has called me to such a religiously diverse family so I can share with them the hope I have in Christ.