Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Violence within the Christian Community

I have heard it said that John 3:16 is the most well-known verse of the Christian Scriptures. While leaving for another day the question of what this says about our evangelistic aims and successes, maybe there is another verse that deserves to be brought to the forefront. In all of the Synoptics, there is a verse that Jesus offered up as the greatest commandment – love the Lord your God and love your neighbor (Matthew 22:36-39, Mark 12:28-31 and Luke 10:27). Eugene Peterson in The Message presents a rather explicit foretaste and the promise, “Do what is fair and just to your neighbor, be compassionate and loyal in your love, And don't take yourself too seriously— take God seriously,” Micah 6:8 and “Because a loveless world," said Jesus, "is a sightless world. If anyone loves me, he will carefully keep my word and my Father will love him—we'll move right into the neighborhood! Not loving me means not keeping my words,” John 14:23.

Yet even within the Christian community, we engage in violence toward each other. Of course I am not suggesting physical violence, the most common understanding of violence. Rather, we practice violence in our speech. Violence includes unjust exercise of power. How many of us have heard that little ditty in our youth, sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me? Despite the well-meaning intent of our parents, to the contrary words have the power to outlast physical injury often times and may inflict deep mental, emotional and spiritual violence on the receiver of those harsh words.

Within the public square, we as a culture seem to have adopted this posture. While we may decry the violence of political smearing, the fact of political smear tactics seems more and more embedded in our world – possibly because while we may abhor its use it must be seen as having an effectiveness we don’t really care to consider. Otherwise why does it still exist, and exist so prominently?

In traveling through the blogosphere I have seen instances of violence, within this specific context, among the brothers and sisters. We are all familiar with the Brian McLaren bit about fundamentalists when he was putting out some notice to get some attention for his new book, and his later admission that the effort was designed to gain some space – but as one blogger noted, after using such a nuclear device, not much room left afterwards for any dialogue. In another controversial post, Professor Rah suggested the emergent movement was for whites only. Several responses, not in the main but there were some, sought to question his journalistic integrity rather than address the issues being raised (and in that post attacking Rah, no effort was made, in my view, to consider that even if the alleged facts being presented within the context of the smear were true that such facts did not detract from the story or its validity). Lest it be seen as pointing a finger at emergents, those on the right have no claim to innocence either (I don’t need to catalogue the Limbaugh rants and others along similar lines.) To maybe a lesser degree, recently on the Scot McKnight blog on the controversial issue of mega-churches, in response to one posting about mega-spending by a mega-church (a bowling alley within the confines of the church!), Mr. McKnight himself apparently a little irked fired back asking whether it was wrong for God to ask Israel to spend lavishly on the temple. Of course, I suspect after firing the shot off, some cooler reflection would have brought to mind that the 2 are simply and vastly different, one for God’s glory and one a mall. Rather than cause some reflection on the validity of the criticism, the shot seemed more designed to shut down that line of the topic.

I suspect many of us would have to admit the cultural insensitivity may be expected – not excusable but rightly or wrongly such is proving to be the case in the mundane of the everyday. On the other hand, I have a sense that when it seems to carry over to those who are more well-known and respected as leading voices, voices that whether we agree or disagree are voices that demand reflection, violence which shuts down dialogue, falls short of the life of Jesus who eschewed violence, as well as falling short of the great commandment. To be critical without grace seems to be simply violent and a abusive act of power, to speak with grace seems to be what just and compassionate are all about and an act that opens the eyes and opens the neighborhood of discussion to Jesus.

Monday, May 24, 2010

Salvation

"How does God decide who receives the gracious gift of salvation?" That provocative question was raised in a blog posting over at Jesus Creed.

David answered this question later in his post when he acknowledged "The final judgment is God's prerogative alone." To speculate on the parameters, in my view, threatens to do violence to others and undermines the mission of the Church. The aim may be better spent in seeking to discern what drives humans to seek to distill a formula for salvation. Maybe the "solution" is to direct the focus of the community of faith toward recognizing the centrality of Jesus for living the time in-between, and moving forward in that relationship - with the focus on listening and obedience to His voice, if you will.

I suppose we humans have this bent that we can solve all mysteries given a little time and space, and if we can’t that means the mystery isn’t real or truth or as some of the new atheists like to label believers, taken over by the mythology called Christianity. To me, it’s like all the excitement about the scientists who are claiming to have created life (A Step to Artificial Life). I have this feeling that science will never be able to “create” life. Rather, the best science can do is to modify that which is already alive. From what I can tell, other than God, no one has been able to create something from nothing (the whole ex nihilio idea). Life is a mystery to those scientists and it just isn’t something that they can, or will down the road, be able to resolve.

"We are chosen to bring the Gospel, in all its fullness, into all of creation" and "We, the Church, have been elected for mission" (2 more quotes from that post) fits into this critique of seeking to render a formula - or to be more accurate and charitable, a significant risk of reducing the Gospel to a formula which is just as offensive and violent. The recent impulse of mission-mindedness seems to be a necessary corrective for living in the here and now and for accomplishing that bringing of the Gospel into all of creation, but it’s the how and in what ways that is the real crunching question. My thoughts have been pretty well set out before, but I am afraid that as we move into this mission mindset we will fall into the temptation to make it a program as well and convert the active and on-going listening and obeying into heard it and here’s what we need to do.

I’m not suggesting that good works aren’t important if you will or that programs are anathema but at best the identification of good works is a secondary consideration. Rather, that we are in serious need of listening to the voice and being obedient to that voice for the season for doing what we are doing for that reason as opposed to trying to solve the mystery and distilling a reasonable (how about that for a dangerous place to be – debating what is reasonable and rational) answer to that mystery, bottling it up and moving it into the market place of ideas.

Sunday, May 9, 2010

On Being a Community of Grace on the Island of Misfit Toys

A while ago I asked the question, “If small groups are the answer, what is the question?” I was reading the latest text by Miroslav Volf, Against the Tide: Love in a Time of Petty Dreams and Persisting Enmities (a great read), when I came to his essay, “Negative Externality.” The line that caught me was, “Jesus’ ministry, of which the treatment of children is a paradigmatic case, presupposes that persons belong to a community of grace in which others’ fragility and even rowdiness are opportunities of service” (at 64).

What stopped me to think was the idea that Volf seems to be suggesting that we, who belong to that community of grace (and would that not be all who are people of faith broken down into relatively manageable units we call church?) will be provided opportunities to serve people who are fragile or rowdy, or worse fragile and rowdy. Thinking about that, what is more frightening is that Volf seems to be implying that there even may be people in that same community who themselves are fragile and/or rowdy. Is that a community I want to be in? or more frightening yet, what if I am someone who gets identified as fragile and/or rowdy? Thinking a little more, if those who are overtly fragile and/or rowdy are removed, gently of course (Donald Miller raised that provocative question in his blog), would it be a better community? At what point does that community lose its standing as a community of grace? Then again, aren’t we all in some way fragile and/or rowdy?

Even though we are approaching summer and thoughts of the Christmas season are far away, I remember that classic animation, Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer, and the image that keeps coming up is the island of misfit toys. If the question now features those in our community of grace who are fragile and/or rowdy (which includes those who are uncomfortable, shy or less than friendly), are small groups still the answer (be it the best answer or the sole answer)? Let us hope and pray that our communities of grace are not like Santa in the Rudolph animation who is unaware of that island or worse has forgotten it exists.

Friday, May 7, 2010

Function and Worth

A dear friend of mine and I were talking about a sermon he was preparing and a critique he received was that he seemed to be making Jesus out as somehow lesser than the Father - part of his references were to Jesus being obedient to the Father. For me the narrative in John 8 comes to mind, “I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me.” (John 8:28b ESV) So for some who hear this verse their thought is that “see Jesus is less than God because He can only do what He was told by God” or for the more literal minded among us, their thought is “heresy for a pastor to imply Jesus is less than God.” For the few who read this blog you know that I'm really firm on the idea that obedience is the good work as opposed to saying hey we are being faithful, look at all the good works we've done.

I know there are a lot of theological arguments that can be raised here, like immanent trinity and economic trinity, and Rahner's argument that there is no difference, and such things, but to me the crux of the matter really is all about how we impose our value system on others and on God.

But I have to ask, why does function have anything to do with essence? We have been steeped in a cultural code that our function is a reflection of our worth. Back in the day, ideas like housework is a women's job (okay please don't throw that stuff at me) and such things, but the idea behind that phrase was how we men had the mis-notion that such labor was simply not something men were designed to do because we had a more important role to fill, or how moving up in the world meant we were making enough money so you could hire a maid to do the menial chores. Or, the statement on the immigration issue that goes something like if we seal off the borders, who will do the labor intensive work of harvesting as we won't have any migrants to do that anymore. I'm sure we all can come up with instances where we judge a person by their function or lack thereof.

I began this thinking about my one friend who is a pastor, and at the end I am thinking of my other friend who is a pastor. He gave up a lucrative career and business (I’m thinking he could have likely afforded a maid) and gave it all up and now pastors in East St. Louis. Some may say foolish and he stepped down to do a "good" thing, but I think the real question is how could he have done anything other than obey? Likewise my other friend stepped out of a lucrative career to pastor young people. For both of my pastor friends, thinking it is likely Jesus is saying they stepped up.

So, what does function have to do with worth?