Why they called it the Peacemaker.

The Colt 45, first went into use in 1873, and later became known as the Peacemaker. It was the colt 45 that Col. G. A. Custer used to make peace at Little Big Horn, but I think it was probably guys like Wyatt Earp, the U.S. Marshall who gave the gun it's legendary name.

These guns were the best thing going from 1873 right through the turn of the century, and remained in production right up until WW2. In 1911 Colt introduced a new 45 designed by John Browning, it was automatic, and the ammunition was stored in a magazine in the grip. It was this design that rendered the revolver obsolete. However, following the war, and driven by Hollywood western films Colt brought the peacemaker back into production in 1956.

What's my point, that the side arm, as a peacemaker, is the stuff of legend in American culture. For some it is more American than apple pie, but most of what we know about the wild west is the product of creative writing.

The problem I have with calling a handgun, a peacemaker, is that guns don't make peace–ever. Guns simply shut down one side of the conflict. Peace without reconciliation isn't peace. Peace is more than the absence of conflict, rather it is the resolution of conflict.

If we are truly going to change the kind of deadly violence that visits schools, we will have to get past the idea that we can kill evil. We can't kill evil because evil doesn't really exist. Evil is simply the absence of good, just like darkness is the absence of light, and cold, the absence of heat, and hate the absence of love. We've been trying to kill the bad guy since well before the wild west, and it's not working.

So while we argue about whether guns kill people, or people kill people, let's consider this, guns don't make peace, people make peace.

Blessed be the peacemakers.

bout bleevin

I think that sharing the good news of the Kingdom of God with people involves inviting them in, involving them in an experiential process. The kind of experiences I’m talking about are so compelling that they change behavior and form new beliefs. This is salvation, it’s messy and in some cases prolonged. I would even suggest that it isn’t individual, it's communal. If we really practice loving community, there would be a collective salvation experience. 

Consider these three different styles of teaching: you can tell someone about something, you can demonstrate the idea, or you can involve them, even immerse them in the idea. To believe, as I understand it, is having so much confidence in knowing something, that it changes your behavior. So what does it take to gain that level of confidence. I don’t think there are very many people who have thrown themselves into a body of water, having read about swimming. As wonderful as words are I don’t think they are enough to create belief.

In most cases Jesus simply invited people to follow him. Was he suggesting that if you hang around, you will begin to see the truth lived out, and it may be easier to believe having seen it demonstrated?

Names

My good friend Sandra Ryan asserts that names are sacred, and not to be messed with. Nicknames, especially ones that denigrate, are so not cool with her. I stood with her, fighting poverty, the kind of poverty that sucks the dignity right out of a persons soul. So when they came in off the street and said their name was Bubs or DumbDumb, she'd just say, "No, your real name." I learned so much from her about the importance of names. Our names are given to us at birth, our nicknames are laid over our names, hiding our true identity, making us fake.

My birth name, as you know, is Wayne, which comes from the trade name Wainwright, or wagon wheel maker. I don't think my parents knew that, they just liked the name. It's interesting though, it harkens back to the middle ages when peoples names were connected to what they did or where they were from (which makes my wonder about my family name). 

Where am I going with this? I agree that names are sacred, and shouldn't be messed with, except when enhanced or honoured with a tagline or title. Sandra also called me Renovator, and she meant it in the broadest sense. She saw my character as one that renovates, revives, restores, brings new vigour. That was helpful then and it continues to guide me now. 

Someone else I worked with called me recalcitrant–oww! That one hurt. I've since learned where that came from. As a renovator, the very first thing you do is start poking at what is, to discover what's hidden, to get to the barebones. Before I understood my character as Renovator, I was poking things that didn't belong to me, or things that I hadn't been invited to renovate. Renovating without contract is destructive, rather than reconstructive. 

Today I hope that I am a true renovator, one who takes great care in the deconstruction process, and even greater care in the renovating so as to discover and reveal not only the original design but the renewed potential. 

My most important renovation project is myself. I am renovating my soul, deconstructing faith and cultural values that were poured into me, removing the decay, and restoring what God imagined me to be. For guidance, I go to the Original Designer.

My next posts will be some of my deconstructive musings, stay tuned.

Whatif

I'ze jus wonderin whatif I posted my random brain clutter. Sometimes I tweet as "whatifwayne, but Twitter is limited to 140 characters, good for whatifs but not so good for wondering. I Face too, but that's a, "hi how are ya" medium, and not really suited to musing. Then there's Linkedin, Pinterest and Instagram, each with their special purpose. I've decided to turn to Blogger to do just that, blog.

For starters I'm going to pull up some old bits n pieces of writing about things I still wonder about, and I'll mix in a few new musings. Driven by a curious mix of cynicism and hope, I'm always wondering about possibility.

Hang out with me, just outside the box, and we can kick some ideas around.