On flags in church

[Amazing Rando]

A really fine opinion piece appeared in the CS Monitor this evening- well worth a read:

Does the American flag belong in church? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080728/cm_csm/yakers)

It gets to the heart of questions of patriotism/nationalism, political power, and the church selling out the gospel of Jesus Christ for the sake of wielding bigger clout in the political realm.

[mossrose]

I don't think there is anything wrong with having the flag of your country displayed in your church. If their focus on God is in the proper place, then why should having the flag be an issue?

If the argument follows through, then no Christian should have a flag displayed at their home, or ever, ever say the pledge of allegiance or sing the national anthem or go to the July 4th fireworks. Isn't all of that political?

Some people try to think too hard about some stuff and create problems where there really aren't any.

I can't wait to see how somebody would react if all the churches removed their flags......

"Those Christians are SO unpatriotic! How dare they not display the flag proudly in their buildings! They should all leave this country and go back to where they came from!"

Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

[Amazing Rando]

I don't think there is anything wrong with having the flag of your country displayed in your church. If their focus on God is in the proper place, then why should having the flag be an issue?

If the argument follows through, then no Christian should have a flag displayed at their home, or ever, ever say the pledge of allegiance or sing the national anthem or go to the July 4th fireworks. Isn't all of that political?

Some of us would say yes to some of those....

But more to the point, it's the fact that church is the sacred space where we worship God. Just as I don't think that it would be appropriate to have a Boston Red Sox penant or a Pepsi billboard in the sacred space, I don't think the flag of any nation belongs there. Issues of idolatry and whatnot.

And it's not just iconoclastic Anabaptists like me- no Catholic or Orthodox church the world over would have a national flag in their sanctuaries.

But those are just the external symptoms of what she's describing in her essay. The underlying issue is something far more widereaching than just symbols or rituals in the worship space.


Some people try to think too hard about some stuff and create problems where there really aren't any.

I can't wait to see how somebody would react if all the churches removed their flags......

"Those Christians are SO unpatriotic! How dare they not display the flag proudly in their buildings! They should all leave this country and go back to where they came from!"

Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

I think it would be a positive witness to the world, letting them know that we have no Lord but Jesus and that it is to him alone that we pledge allegiance. But you're right, it sure would cause an uproar!

[Faramir]

I, like the writer of the article, was raised in a "flag tauting" congregation. And for years, never gave it much thought. However, recently I have gotten more and more uncomfortable with the idea of a national flag in a church. Not sure if it is something I care enough to bring up as my current church does not sport a US flag.

However, I did go the Bible School evening performance at my parents church (which my youngest went to) and they said three pledges (To the US Flag, to the Bible, to the Christian Flag). I admit I was abit uncomfortable, not only about saying the pledge to the flag in church, but because the US flag was the first pledge.)

On the other hand, I think many of the arguments made in the article actually support the opposite view. That the US flag should be in churches. Specifically the arguments about past oppressive governments (both Christian and non-Christian).

The US (and most other modern Western nations) is an exception to the historic abuse of power against religion. Therefore it is certainly more deserving of a place of honor that the examples of power abusing governmetns given in the article.

(I never said that the were good arguments for the place of the US flag in the church).

[Amazing Rando]

Can you push that out a little more? Why do you think the US flag might be more deserving of a place in the sanctuary than flags of other nations? Because the US government hasn't outlawed Christianity?

A really terrific book recently written on this subject (not flags specifically although that is included, but churches' obsession with the pursuit of political power) is Greg Boyd's The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church (http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Christian-Nation-Political-Destroying/dp/0310267315/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217358749&sr=8-1). It's a challenging and superb read.

[Faramir]

Can you push that out a little more? Why do you think the US flag might be more deserving of a place in the sanctuary than flags of other nations? Because the US government hasn't outlawed Christianity?

It was not so much the US is "more deserving than other nations", but the US more than other governments that the article in the OP cited (Rome, early Christians governements that persecuted heterodoxy as defined by those Christians in power, ect.). I did qualify that I incuded most modern Western governents in with the US. Any argument of US vs. Rome, midevil Europe etc. would also aply to any other country that allows religious freedom (and I did acknowledge that it was not a very good argument having a national flag in a church).



A really terrific book recently written on this subject (not flags specifically although that is included, but churches' obsession with the pursuit of political power) is Greg Boyd's The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church (http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Christian-Nation-Political-Destroying/dp/0310267315/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217358749&sr=8-1). It's a challenging and superb read.

I might have to check it out.

[Raphael]

The churches I've been involved in had American flags in them...but then they also had South African, Zimbabwean, Namibian, British, German, Singaporean, Russian, Malaysian, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, etc. But that's because they're flags of countries where people in the Church have been to (on church related things, conferences, mission trips etc.)

I find the idea that some of you americans have people doing the pledge of allegiance while at church to be somewhat disturbing though

[Amazing Rando]

The churches I've been involved in had American flags in them...but then they also had South African, Zimbabwean, Namibian, British, German, Singaporean, Russian, Malaysian, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, etc. But that's because they're flags of countries where people in the Church have been to (on church related things, conferences, mission trips etc.)

Oh, that's pretty cool! So they're more reminders of work the church has done in the global mission field, rather than signs of allegiance or something.

[Raphael]

Oh, that's pretty cool! So they're more reminders of work the church has done in the global mission field, rather than signs of allegiance or something.
Exactly.

[Amazing Rando]

Here's a part of a worship lintany which I really like composed by the guys at Jesus for President (http://www.jesusforpresident.org/propaganda/index.html)-


One: Today we pledge our ultimate allegiance… to the Kingdom of God
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To a peace that is not like Rome’s
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the Gospel of enemy love
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the Kingdom of the poor and broken
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To a King that loves his enemies so much he died for them
All: We pledge allegiance

One: To the least of these, with whom Christ dwells
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the transnational Church that transcends the artificial borders of nations
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the refugee of Nazareth
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the homeless rabbi who had no place to lay his head
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the cross rather than the sword
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the banner of love above any flag
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the one who rules with a towel rather than an iron fist
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the one who rides a donkey rather than a war-horse
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the revolution that sets both oppressed and oppressors free
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the Way that leads to life
All: We pledge allegiance
One: To the Slaughtered Lamb
All: We pledge allegiance
One: And together we proclaim his praises, from the margins of the empire to the centers of wealth and power
All: Long Live the Slaughtered Lamb
One: Long Live the Slaughtered Lamb
All: Long Live the Slaughtered Lamb

Now that's a pledge of allegiance that belongs in our churches!

[Pilgrim]

This was a huge deal at my church before I arrived as pastor. People actually left over the issue.

The problem, as I see it, is the extreemes to which people confuse nationalism with patriotism and faith with both. I was at a meeting of our Presbytery a few weeks ago that was started by a worship service in which liturgical dancers paraded up and down the aisles of the church waving flags to "Proud to be an American" and this was supposed to be worship? Yeah, it was worship, but worship of what? Not God certainly.

In my congregation we've made a compromise and we bring the flag into the sanctuary from the fellowship hall on national holidays as a reminder that we should be thankful for our circumstance as Americans. But we also remember that our prayers of God's blessing and intervention extend to all nations.

[Amazing Rando]

Thanks for that Pilgrim. It's great to know of churches that are conscious of the issues involved and wrestle with them honestly and forthrightly, no matter how they ultimately resolve them.


And now, this Woody Guthrie song, brought to my attention by our friend from across the big Pond, SteveF.


Let's have Christ our President
Let us have him for our king
Cast your vote for the Carpenter
That you call the Nazarene

The only way we can ever beat
These crooked politician men
Is to run the money changers out of the temple
Put the Carpenter in

O It's Jesus Christ our President
God above our king
With a job and a pension for young and old
We will make hallelujah ring

Every year we waste enough
To feed the ones who starve
We build our civilization up
And we shoot it down with wars

But with the Carpenter on the seat
Way up in the Capital town
The USA would be on the way
Prosperity Bound!

[jwarrend]

A really fine opinion piece appeared in the CS Monitor this evening- well worth a read:

Does the American flag belong in church? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080728/cm_csm/yakers)

It gets to the heart of questions of patriotism/nationalism, political power, and the church selling out the gospel of Jesus Christ for the sake of wielding bigger clout in the political realm.

To be honest, Rando, I didn't think that the article was very good. To my reading, it conflates the issues you indicate, treating "having patriotic feelings" as though this is part and parcel of "selling out the gospel for political power". Sure, some people do the latter. People do all sorts of things in the name of acquiring power. That doesn't mean that everyone who expresses patriotic sentiments is, deep down inside, "infatuated with power", as the article alleges.

I see no incongruity between being a Christian and being proud to be an American. When we say "God bless America", we aren't appending "...and nobody else", but rather, are recognizing that God's providence has been present in the formation and development of this nation. That was something that the founders explicitly recognized, and I don't believe that it can plausibly be argued that they misperceived this. Psalm 144 says "...happy is that people whose god is the Lord". Throughout the OT, God deals with nations, not just individual people -- He evidently doesn't believe that national boundaries (be they geographic, ethnic, or what have you) are arbitrary and meaningless. Neither should we. I have no problem with expressing gratitude to God for America's existence and success, or with praying for its continued survival and prosperity.

I could load up this final paragraph with caveats, but I think the bottom line is simply that patriotism does not in any way detract from our commitment to God, nor does it require taking away loyalty that we owe to God and giving it to another. If anything, our patriotism should flow from our appreciation to God. Moreover, America is the ideal context for such a sentiment, as such claims cannot possibly imply superiority of one ethnicity over another -- not "thank you God that I happened to be born [insert ethnicity here]", but "thank you for this place that you in your providence enabled to exist". Incidentally, this to me is one of the great attractions of our society -- that because of its rich ethnic diversity, it's a reflection of what the kingdom of heaven will look like.

-Jeff

[Heartablaze]

I'll admit that our 'God and Country Day' the week of July 4th at the church was a little weird. The songs were just weird...well, we actually sang Yankee Doodle Dandy among them. I know it was something to bring in the people who would not normally come to church, to honor our armed forces and have some fun, but these songs took the place of our worship songs.
I guess I shouldn't complain too much, since we do have pretty good theology at my church, but it was just surreal. Not a lot of praising God, more praising the country. But it's not something we do all the time, or that we emphasize at any other time of the year. So I don't know if it's just an annoyance thing or what.

[Amazing Rando]

To be honest, Rando, I didn't think that the article was very good. To my reading, it conflates the issues you indicate, treating "having patriotic feelings" as though this is part and parcel of "selling out the gospel for political power". Sure, some people do the latter. People do all sorts of things in the name of acquiring power. That doesn't mean that everyone who expresses patriotic sentiments is, deep down inside, "infatuated with power", as the article alleges.

Maybe you're right there- as I see it, the essay addresses two different issues:
1) The potential for idolatry when we lose sight of the kingdom of God as our ultimate loyalty and replace it with patriotism, as manifested by the symbols of patriotism present in the worship space. (Note I said potential for idolatry- I agree with you that it doesn't always follow, but I think it's quite common.) And
2) The pursuit of power as a corrupting influence on the integrity of the gospel and as unbecoming of disciples of the Lord who abjured all the power in the world (political and otherwise) to take the form of a suffering servant.


I see no incongruity between being a Christian and being proud to be an American. When we say "God bless America", we aren't appending "...and nobody else", but rather, are recognizing that God's providence has been present in the formation and development of this nation.

I can understand wanting to thank God for his graciousness to us in the present and throughout history. But what about other nations then? Was God's providence at work in the formation and development of, say, China, Iran, or North Korea? Nazi Germany? You've got to take the bad as well as the good under your umbrella there in order to be consistent.

As for me, I can't in good conscience say "God bless America" without feeling compelled to add to the list of countries I want God to bless, as I did here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=2361708#post2361708).


That was something that the founders explicitly recognized, and I don't believe that it can plausibly be argued that they misperceived this. Psalm 144 says "...happy is that people whose god is the Lord". Throughout the OT, God deals with nations, not just individual people -- He evidently doesn't believe that national boundaries (be they geographic, ethnic, or what have you) are arbitrary and meaningless. Neither should we. I have no problem with expressing gratitude to God for America's existence and success, or with praying for its continued survival and prosperity.

But he ultimately pointed to the fact that Israel was at its most faithful when it was in exile. It was in exile that Israel regained her dependence on God's gracious provision for all aspects of life and recounted God's saving acts on Israel's behalf. It's this political posture of exile, of "aliens and strangers in the world" as 1 Peter 2:11 puts it, rather than that of a concrete nations with geographical boundaries and all, that the people of God stand at their most faithful to him.

In this regard, I'd like to offer you two resources to check out when you get the chance. First, the book Resident Aliens: Life in the Christian Colony (http://www.amazon.com/Resident-Aliens-Life-Christian-Colony/dp/0687361591/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217431783&sr=8-1) by Stanley Hauerwas and William Willimon, about existing as God's faithful people in this posture of political exile.

Secondly, this passage (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/diognetus-roberts.html)from the the mid-second century apologetic Epistle to Diognetus describes how the Christians viewed themselves and their political identity as God's holy nation in exile:


CHAPTER V -- THE MANNERS OF THE CHRISTIANS.

For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed. They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. They are poor, yet make many rich; they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.

CHAPTER VI -- THE RELATION OF CHRISTIANS TO THE WORLD.

To sum up all in one word--what the soul is in the body, that are Christians in the world. The soul is dispersed through all the members of the body, and Christians are scattered through all the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the body, yet is not of the body; and Christians dwell in the world, yet are not of the world. The invisible soul is guarded by the visible body, and Christians are known indeed to be in the world, but their godliness remains invisible. The flesh hates the soul, and wars against it, though itself suffering no injury, because it is prevented from enjoying pleasures; the world also hates the Christians, though in nowise injured, because they abjure pleasures. The soul loves the flesh that hates it, and [loves also] the members; Christians likewise love those that hate them. The soul is imprisoned in the body, yet preserves that very body; and Christians are confined in the world as in a prison, and yet they are the preservers of the world. The immortal soul dwells in a mortal tabernacle; and Christians dwell as sojourners in corruptible [bodies], looking for an incorruptible dwelling in the heavens. The soul, when but ill-provided with food and drink, becomes better; in like manner, the Christians, though subjected day by day to punishment, increase the more in number. God has assigned them this illustrious position, which it were unlawful for them to forsake.


I could load up this final paragraph with caveats, but I think the bottom line is simply that patriotism does not in any way detract from our commitment to God, nor does it require taking away loyalty that we owe to God and giving it to another. If anything, our patriotism should flow from our appreciation to God. Moreover, America is the ideal context for such a sentiment, as such claims cannot possibly imply superiority of one ethnicity over another -- not "thank you God that I happened to be born [insert ethnicity here]", but "thank you for this place that you in your providence enabled to exist". Incidentally, this to me is one of the great attractions of our society -- that because of its rich ethnic diversity, it's a reflection of what the kingdom of heaven will look like.

-Jeff

Yet racial/ethnic idolatry like you describe can easily be replaced with nationalistic idolatry if one is not careful. "I thank God that I was born Irish" (for example) can just as easily easily become "I thank God I was born in the United States, the greatest country in the world (Alleluia Amen!)." Yes I'm being somewhat facetious here, but only to illustrate the dangers of what I see happening all around us. Nobody means to supplant their ultimate allegiance to God with loyalty to other things, be it money, family, tradition, or the nation, but it happens nonetheless. Despite our best intentions, Jesus Christ is replaced as our first love by something else. And oftentimes, those who do it are not even aware that they are doing it, and would vociferously deny it, yet it remains true nonetheless.

Anyway, as regards pariotism and loyalty to "God and country" I really like the sentiments of Jim Forrest of the Orthodox Peace Fellowship. I think he gets his priorities exactly right in his talk here (http://incommunion.org/articles/conferences-lectures/orthodox-christian-approach-to-peacemaking):


A final comment about the word “Orthodox”: It means, as St. Paul says that we are no longer Greek nor Jew. Nationality is secondary. It is not the national flag that is placed on the altar but the Gospel. For us, even though we find ourselves in an Orthodox Church divided on national or jurisdictional lines, it means we are no longer American or Russian or Dutch or Serbian or whatever. Rather we are one people united in baptism and faith whose identity and responsibility includes but goes beyond the land where we were born or the culture and mother tongue that shaped us.

In my own case, I am not first American, then Orthodox, and finally — if there is some room left — a Christian. No. I am an Orthodox Christian — “Orthodox” is an only adjective — who also happens to be an American, with the complication of being an American living in Holland. But being American and living in Holland come afterward. It is in parentheses. It is in small type. The main thing, the banner headline, is that I am trying to follow Christ, to live according to the Gospel, and participate in the sacramental mysteries.

I think he gets his priorties exactly where they ought to be. Being American is "in small type" compared to our true identity which is in Christ. It is "in parentheses" (if it is even visible at all).

[Amazing Rando]

I'll admit that our 'God and Country Day' the week of July 4th at the church was a little weird. The songs were just weird...well, we actually sang Yankee Doodle Dandy among them. I know it was something to bring in the people who would not normally come to church, to honor our armed forces and have some fun, but these songs took the place of our worship songs.
I guess I shouldn't complain too much, since we do have pretty good theology at my church, but it was just surreal. Not a lot of praising God, more praising the country. But it's not something we do all the time, or that we emphasize at any other time of the year. So I don't know if it's just an annoyance thing or what.

I'd say that's a very healthy suspicion you've raised, and would be worth voicing to your church in whatever capacity you're able.

[jwarrend]

I can understand wanting to thank God for his graciousness to us in the present and throughout history. But what about other nations then? Was God's providence at work in the formation and development of, say, China, Iran, or North Korea? Nazi Germany? You've got to take the bad as well as the good under your umbrella there in order to be consistent.

I don't understand your point here; attributing some good outcome to God's providential intervention reflects an awareness that God, and not happenstance, is ultimately responsible for having brought about that good outcome. I have never heard a definition of providence that necessitates attributing bad outcomes to providence.



As for me, I can't in good conscience say "God bless America" without feeling compelled to add to the list of countries I want God to bless, as I did here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=2361708#post2361708).

I don't have a problem with this as such; I would simply ask that when someone does add not such a list, that they nevertheless should not be seen as having made a jingoistic statement.



But he ultimately pointed to the fact that Israel was at its most faithful when it was in exile. It was in exile that Israel regained her dependence on God's gracious provision for all aspects of life and recounted God's saving acts on Israel's behalf. It's this political posture of exile, of "aliens and strangers in the world" as 1 Peter 2:11 puts it, rather than that of a concrete nations with geographical boundaries and all, that the people of God stand at their most faithful to him.


I'll have to think about this some more, but I'm not yet convinced. I don't think "exile" is necessarily "the ideal state to which we should aspire". Certainly, the Exodus doesn't reflect such a sentiment. I would say that being in a state of exile has qualities that are conducive to following God's will. But being in a state of national obedience has other qualities that are conducive to following God's will as well. It's not a matter of one being more desirable than the other, so much as that being in exile or oppressed is no hindrance to the growth of the gospel. That doesn't mean that we should be indifferent to our conditions or the conditions of others. If we can remove the weight of oppression off of someone, we should -- we aren't doing them a disservice.



In this regard, I'd like to offer you two resources to check out when you get the chance. First, the book Resident Aliens: Life in the Christian Colony (http://www.amazon.com/Resident-Aliens-Life-Christian-Colony/dp/0687361591/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217431783&sr=8-1) by Stanley Hauerwas and William Willimon, about existing as God's faithful people in this posture of political exile.


Interesting; Hauerwas's book on Heresies is next in my queue on Amazon. I'll have to give this one a look as well.



Secondly, this passage (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/diognetus-roberts.html)from the the mid-second century apologetic Epistle to Diognetus describes how the Christians viewed themselves and their political identity as God's holy nation in exile:


This is an interesting read and I commend the believers being referenced for their excellent witness. But again, just as above, I don't read this as saying "clearly, being God's nation in exile is the ideal state" -- the reality is that they WERE God's nation in exile and they made the best of it. If some later group of people had the opportunity to set up a nation that would follow God's precepts, I don't see why that wouldn't have been seen as in an irretrievably lost cause.



Nobody means to supplant their ultimate allegiance to God with loyalty to other things, be it money, family, tradition, or the nation, but it happens nonetheless. Despite our best intentions, Jesus Christ is replaced as our first love by something else. And oftentimes, those who do it are not even aware that they are doing it, and would vociferously deny it, yet it remains true nonetheless.

Absolutely true, however, to be honest, "patriotism" seems to me to be far down on the list of idols that people are replacing Christ with.

I don't really disagree with your overall cautionary notes, I just dispute the degree to which, in actual practice, patriotism gives rise to the concerns you express. I think that by and large, it's a healthy rather than worrisome sentiment.

-Jeff

[joel]

A really fine opinion piece appeared in the CS Monitor this evening- well worth a read:

Does the American flag belong in church? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080728/cm_csm/yakers)

It gets to the heart of questions of patriotism/nationalism, political power, and the church selling out the gospel of Jesus Christ for the sake of wielding bigger clout in the political realm.


"Political power is a synonym for "physical force," for bending people to government's will regardless of their inclinations, interests, or welfare. But Christianity is love – power's antidote....Churches hope to change circumstances through political force when Jesus called us to change hearts and minds with his message."

What ought the Church/Christians do instead? Oppose government (political power) wherever it is found, and do our best to abolish it?

Surely we ought not be merely indifferent to political power. If we ought not seek to influence it (i.e., make use of it, pursue it, etc.), and we ought not be indifferent to it, then I'm not seeing any alternative than that we ought to abolish every form of it.



...can just as easily easily become "I thank God I was born in the United States, the greatest country in the world (Alleluia Amen!)."
It's not clear that that would be wrong per se.
I personally am not sure that's a correct value judgment. Though I think the United States once was the greatest country in the world, it has had some divergence from the founding philosophy and values that are its greatness.

[Darth Executor]

Throughout history, Christians have usually been on the wrong side of government.

Not really true. Christianity has been in control more often than it's been subjugated by a government.

That said, no church should display the flag of any country that allows abortion (to begin with), or any other gross offenses against God. I think the US is a heck of a lot better than most countries in the world but it's still not good enough.