4)
Finally, I wanted to ask what it means to live this stuff out. Are
there different approaches for Kingdom living? How do we work on
becoming a part of God's Kingdom? Any thoughts or advice you have would
be great.
Well this is the issue isn't it? How do we do this? If you ask me how does my community live this out I would have to answer honestly... not very well, but we are trying to get better.
There are many different approaches, and many different avenues. What we have decided to do is to go down a weird hybrid of the house church network, and the intentional community path. Others have chosen to focus on intentional community and monastic practice, while everyone attends different churches. Some have chosen to stay completely committed to their denominational church, or the Catholic church while practicing radical community and social justice like the Catholic worker communities. Some have decided to continue their work in the midst of the city, or the suburbs. Some have decided to move out of the mainstream and try to live off the grid.
The issues are so very complex, that it is never easy to make a clear answer to what should anyone do. We can hardly figure out what we should do, which makes it very ridiculous to give much advice to others. But we have learned some principles that have helped us along the way. The first is that we need to realize that we are stronger, wiser and more complete as a group than as individuals. We should spend the time to talk, to discuss, to sit in silent waitfulness, and then to make a decision as a group. I even let my group decide which speaking engagements I should take, or even if I should take a long vacation. Why? because I can figure out lots of reasons to make my own desires sound the most efficient and credible path, I need others that are just as committed to the path to help me figure it out.
A perfect example is worship. We meet on Monday nights for a communal meal, and a discussion or some kind of reflection upon the scriptures. There are mostly Christian people (though from radically different perspectives), but a few non-theists that are with us regularly. So we talked about worship as something we would like to consider a part of our regular practice without being alienating towards those that don't recognize a personal deity. We talked about it, and came up with this idea: We can all realize the good that comes from being thankful, and from appreciating the wonder and beauty we see in life. So let us take time to reflect and share about things we are thankful and in awe of as a regular part of our time together. It is all about learning to grow together.
The best advice I could give is that we first need to recognize the upside down nature of all Jesus says. Don't take revenge, forgive. Don't seek for security, but trust. Don't seek fortune, but be stupidly generous. Do not accept injustice, but resist it non violently even if it means your death. It is not the people that are most talented, wealthy, or holy that are blessed but those that learn to serve the poor, the marginalized, the sinners the heretics, the sick, the imprisoned ect. is completely at odds with how this world operates
Secondly we need to recognize we have a whole system that is built to teach us, to pull us, to push us and threaten us to continue in the hierarchical structure of oppression. Whether it is the lies of consumerism, or the fear of violence from bad men, everything in our society is designed to support the structure of power and hierarchy.
And then realizing these first two, we must also realize that we need a community to both live an alternative to this hierarchy, and to see clearly how we must address the needs of our current world, thinking both globally and locally if possible. It is in these communities that we practice the ideals that the world needs in order to move past the hierarchy of power and wealth. But it is also in these communities that we figure out how to live as a community to address some of these issues in ourselves and our neighborhood. It would be my goal in our "network" that we would have many small groups that have different flavors of the revolution. Some might be more concerned with economic justice, some with restorative justice through the penal system, others might be focused on racial reconciliation, others might have radical anti war and non violence activists, ect. That we would all support, and encourage one another in all of these kingdom tasks, as well as be educated by each other as to how our everyday lives can help us to address these concerns.
I have an amazing vision of several community houses that take in those in need, that share food, and that grow it as well. Of small groups that meet in homes to eat together and learn how they can begin the journey towards a new way of being human, living in this kingdom of God. Of places where people can come to learn trades, good work, work with integrity and value. Building things, growing things, helping people rather than just making money for its own sake. Of studios where we can practice the creativity that is in each of us, making art and healing in the process. I have a vision of a group of people that are as committed to each other as they are to changing the world. I am a dreamer, I have lived 45 years, suffered much failure, little success, and quite a bit of ridicule, yet I still believe.
rev
Showing posts with label non-violence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label non-violence. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Question 3: Kingdom of God?
3)
Another thing that's come up recently is what the Kingdom of God means.
I used that phrase a few times in my blog, and didn't realize that
others might hear it very differently than I do. What does the Kingdom
mean for non-believers? How do people who are trying to set it up here
on earth share the Kingdom, or even the Kingdom work, with those who
don't believe in God? Should the goal of Christians be to convert them
so that they can be saved, and share in this Kingdom?
So... this really is one of the most important parts of this whole discussion. What does the kingdom of God, or the kingdom of heaven mean? It is the essence of almost everything Jesus said, it is what the parables are meant to illustrate. A good friend of mine suggests that from a marketing stand point, if you were to break Jesus' message down into a bumper sticker it would be "the kingdom of God is in your midst".
Now there have been countless volumes written about the kingdom of God, or heaven (Matthew uses this phrase more often). I could not and will not come close to touching all of the intricacies of exactly what it means, and how it effects us. I will offer up some very basic understandings of what I have learned over the years, and what I believe to be true.
First off it is important to look at the word kingdom. The word kingdom doesn't have a very modern ring to it. When we think of kings and queens we are just as likely to think of knights and dragons and damsels in distress, as we are to think of the royal family in England with all of their scandal and opulence. But for us the understanding of kingdom would not really have a very concrete meaning. It would have had a more concrete meaning when it was originally translate into English however. But what is interesting is the word used for kingdom in the scriptures, was not the word kingdom, it was the word empire. And in Jesus time, this word would have had huge implications. As the empire was quite literally the oppressive super power government that was in charge of the known world at that time. Jesus begins talking about an empire that belongs to God, not Caesar. An altogether different political reality than the one that existed. And what is even more revolutionary is Jesus seems to say that this kingdom is here in His person, but is also to be lived out, and also coming. We will get to this a bit more later
Now we have to contextualize things. What exactly would Jesus mean in our day and age? We don't really talk about kingdoms, nor is the idea of empire really one that we understand much since the hey day of the English Empire (though many rightly point out the empirical nature of the United States). If Jesus were speaking to us today what word would he use instead of empire? As an American I would suggest two different terms. Those of you in other countries can apply your own contextualization. I think nation, would be a possible word in America. Since America as a nation is a cultural melting pot to some extent it could work. So Christ could talk to us today about the nation of God. But I think a better phrase in todays world, would focus on the worldwide global economy. I think that the global economy actually is more of the "powers that be" than even the mega power US. So Jesus would speak to us today about the "economy of God"
So Jesus comes into the world speaking of the economy of God, he then explains it and lives it. It is not a future tense destination, but a journey towards the ultimate reality. It begins in Him. It is looking at the way God means things to be, and beginning to live like God's will is reality, even in the phase face of the economy of the world. And it affects everything. Economy is essentially about power, and value. In todays world the stories of Jesus would be incredibly subversive. They would speak about the idea that in God's economy it is those that are undervalued, that have the greater value in God's. It would talk about the injustice that keeps those that are more powerful on top of those that have no resource to grasp power. And just like Jesus quite literally did in his time, would say in our time, "you cannot live in the worlds economy, and in God's, as God's economy does not value the same things, so get rid of your economic comforts and follow me into a new world of sharing, and forgiving, and loving even those that might try and harm your economic status through an oil monopoly" What Jesus tells us is stories that explain how Gods desires for our world, can and must be lived out here and now, as a prophetic act of faith. It's ties to the future is simply this, in the redemption of all things, this is how we will live... so believing this is true we will start living in this reality here and now.
I personally believe that the disciples did not believe all of the things we say are essential Christian doctrine until much later. But they began to walk with Jesus, and take part in that ideal of the economy of God. They were called disciples for beginning to walk in "the way" so why do we think conversion is the necessary first step? Lets walk together and live out this kingdom (which by the way is pretty much the teachings of all the major religions, and thoughtful secular humanism) and leave conversion up to God. It is my hope that everyone believes as I believe, as I find much comfort, and joy and challenge in it, but that does not mean I cannot work with others, nor does it mean that my ulterior motive is to convert them.
Ultimately I think we need to follow the example of Jesus. Jesus pulled together a community of very diverse people, and began to live out the kingdom. His words and teachings had power and authority because of the integrity of his life. When you live what you say, it matters. Jesus lived, in this community, an ethic that said the people who are considered least valuable... these will be our friends, and focus. The people that are not only considered most valuable, but hold that value with deceit and violence we will call to repentance. We will care for the sick, we will share our resources with each other, we will not engage in us and them mentality. We will practice non violent resistance towards oppressors. And most of all we will live a life of love. It is my belief that we need everyone who is willing to join us in this new economy, regardless of "spiritual" belief system.
rev
So... this really is one of the most important parts of this whole discussion. What does the kingdom of God, or the kingdom of heaven mean? It is the essence of almost everything Jesus said, it is what the parables are meant to illustrate. A good friend of mine suggests that from a marketing stand point, if you were to break Jesus' message down into a bumper sticker it would be "the kingdom of God is in your midst".
Now there have been countless volumes written about the kingdom of God, or heaven (Matthew uses this phrase more often). I could not and will not come close to touching all of the intricacies of exactly what it means, and how it effects us. I will offer up some very basic understandings of what I have learned over the years, and what I believe to be true.
First off it is important to look at the word kingdom. The word kingdom doesn't have a very modern ring to it. When we think of kings and queens we are just as likely to think of knights and dragons and damsels in distress, as we are to think of the royal family in England with all of their scandal and opulence. But for us the understanding of kingdom would not really have a very concrete meaning. It would have had a more concrete meaning when it was originally translate into English however. But what is interesting is the word used for kingdom in the scriptures, was not the word kingdom, it was the word empire. And in Jesus time, this word would have had huge implications. As the empire was quite literally the oppressive super power government that was in charge of the known world at that time. Jesus begins talking about an empire that belongs to God, not Caesar. An altogether different political reality than the one that existed. And what is even more revolutionary is Jesus seems to say that this kingdom is here in His person, but is also to be lived out, and also coming. We will get to this a bit more later
Now we have to contextualize things. What exactly would Jesus mean in our day and age? We don't really talk about kingdoms, nor is the idea of empire really one that we understand much since the hey day of the English Empire (though many rightly point out the empirical nature of the United States). If Jesus were speaking to us today what word would he use instead of empire? As an American I would suggest two different terms. Those of you in other countries can apply your own contextualization. I think nation, would be a possible word in America. Since America as a nation is a cultural melting pot to some extent it could work. So Christ could talk to us today about the nation of God. But I think a better phrase in todays world, would focus on the worldwide global economy. I think that the global economy actually is more of the "powers that be" than even the mega power US. So Jesus would speak to us today about the "economy of God"
So Jesus comes into the world speaking of the economy of God, he then explains it and lives it. It is not a future tense destination, but a journey towards the ultimate reality. It begins in Him. It is looking at the way God means things to be, and beginning to live like God's will is reality, even in the phase face of the economy of the world. And it affects everything. Economy is essentially about power, and value. In todays world the stories of Jesus would be incredibly subversive. They would speak about the idea that in God's economy it is those that are undervalued, that have the greater value in God's. It would talk about the injustice that keeps those that are more powerful on top of those that have no resource to grasp power. And just like Jesus quite literally did in his time, would say in our time, "you cannot live in the worlds economy, and in God's, as God's economy does not value the same things, so get rid of your economic comforts and follow me into a new world of sharing, and forgiving, and loving even those that might try and harm your economic status through an oil monopoly" What Jesus tells us is stories that explain how Gods desires for our world, can and must be lived out here and now, as a prophetic act of faith. It's ties to the future is simply this, in the redemption of all things, this is how we will live... so believing this is true we will start living in this reality here and now.
I personally believe that the disciples did not believe all of the things we say are essential Christian doctrine until much later. But they began to walk with Jesus, and take part in that ideal of the economy of God. They were called disciples for beginning to walk in "the way" so why do we think conversion is the necessary first step? Lets walk together and live out this kingdom (which by the way is pretty much the teachings of all the major religions, and thoughtful secular humanism) and leave conversion up to God. It is my hope that everyone believes as I believe, as I find much comfort, and joy and challenge in it, but that does not mean I cannot work with others, nor does it mean that my ulterior motive is to convert them.
Ultimately I think we need to follow the example of Jesus. Jesus pulled together a community of very diverse people, and began to live out the kingdom. His words and teachings had power and authority because of the integrity of his life. When you live what you say, it matters. Jesus lived, in this community, an ethic that said the people who are considered least valuable... these will be our friends, and focus. The people that are not only considered most valuable, but hold that value with deceit and violence we will call to repentance. We will care for the sick, we will share our resources with each other, we will not engage in us and them mentality. We will practice non violent resistance towards oppressors. And most of all we will live a life of love. It is my belief that we need everyone who is willing to join us in this new economy, regardless of "spiritual" belief system.
rev
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Question number 1.
1)
Rev, a question that has come up a few times after the blog I posted,
and after I put a documentary about you up on Facebook a while back, is
what you mean when you say that as a Christian Anarchist you "submit
your life to the teachings of Jesus, and not to anything else." Aren't
Christians taught to submit to the leaders of the Church? Didn't the
early church have Bishops, Apostles, Elders, and Councils?
I am gonna give you the medium length answer on this one. The short one is probably too short, and the long one is a book or two.
Let me clarify something at the start, if I said I do not submit to anything else then I misspoke. I do in fact submit myself to others, and I think it is right and correct to do so, and in fact it is impossible to do otherwise. What I believe is that we should submit ourselves to one another as a community of people. This is clearly taught in scripture. "Submit yourselves to one another". I have found this very helpful in my life, as I realize that I am not always able to see my own weakness. In addition, if we are all submitted to one another, than one person cannot become above others. This keeps us all in loving service to each other.
Which works perfectly with the actual concept of anarchy. Anarchy is not Chaos, nor is it disorder. Anarchy means, literally, against the powers. What I take that to mean in a Christian context is that we are to resist the "powers". The structures that are oppressive and hierarchical. The social, political and religious structures that keep certain people at the top and others at the bottom. These structures are to be rejected. This does not however mean that we cannot have laws, rules, and covenants with each other. What it does mean is that we do not create a structure that empowers people to have power over others.
Does the church teach submission to the church leaders? Even the doctrines of past leaders? yes it does. Is that the teachings of Christ or the bible? They say so, I am not so sure. What we must remember is that what we see as the church now, is much much different than what we saw for the first few hundred years. In my opinion we see a very significant change in the church with the "conversion" of Constantine, and the legitimizing of Christianity in the early 300's. It was at that time that church became part of an unholy alliance of church and state. Where leaders in Christian community became men of power, and riches. Where the faith was codified and that codification was enforced. We have adopted a system that has mimicked government ever since. In this system, you obey in the chain of command, but this was not the early way.
The early church recognized people with giftings. Some people were good at leading, some at teaching, some at starting up new faith communities and so on. These individuals were sometimes but not often taken out of a "normal" life to be allowed to focus on these things. But in the church their opinions were just counted with double honor. They werent even "elected officials" The church community was to submit to the church community, not bishops or elders. But bishops and elders had a few more miles on their tires so their opinions held a bit more weight, which is all fair and good. The church did not submit to the Bishops and elders, the bishops and elders submitted to the church. Though like I said their opinion had extra weight, it was the community that was entrusted with power, not people.
We see this played out very well in the first council. There was a little controversy around circumcision. Those that were not born in the Hebrew culture were being pressured to be circumcised. Understandably, they said, "um... I like this Jesus dude, and I want to follow in the way, but is cutting off a piece of my junk really necessary?" Everyone got upset. So all of the churches sent some representatives to the church as Jerusalem. Why? Because they were the most well established and had the most people that actually had walked with Jesus? Nope, it was because the people causing the problems came from the churches in Jerusalem. They talked and argued. Now look at who was on the guest list? Peter, the rock of the church, James the actual brother of Jesus, Paul the guy who started most of the churches around the world and wrote most of the new testament, as well as a number of other apostles, bishops, ect. And what is the response?
"we the church at Jerusalem, (recognize that in this time the first mentioned person or group had more weight) and the apostles that are here with us want to clear this up. Sorry that these people from here made things all messy. But the church here would give you this advise" Now look at what we have, not hey we need to go to Jerusalem and appeal this all the way up to the supreme head honcho Peter the rock, work through the hierarchy and have an official proclamation that this is the Christian perspective on the matter! If you do not believe and practice this Peter declares you will not be going to heaven and are not "really" a Christian. No, we all got together and talked, in the end our community would give this advise to your's.
to me this is a different way of life, not hierarchy, but relationship, and empowerment. Not power over, power alongside.
rev
I am gonna give you the medium length answer on this one. The short one is probably too short, and the long one is a book or two.
Let me clarify something at the start, if I said I do not submit to anything else then I misspoke. I do in fact submit myself to others, and I think it is right and correct to do so, and in fact it is impossible to do otherwise. What I believe is that we should submit ourselves to one another as a community of people. This is clearly taught in scripture. "Submit yourselves to one another". I have found this very helpful in my life, as I realize that I am not always able to see my own weakness. In addition, if we are all submitted to one another, than one person cannot become above others. This keeps us all in loving service to each other.
Which works perfectly with the actual concept of anarchy. Anarchy is not Chaos, nor is it disorder. Anarchy means, literally, against the powers. What I take that to mean in a Christian context is that we are to resist the "powers". The structures that are oppressive and hierarchical. The social, political and religious structures that keep certain people at the top and others at the bottom. These structures are to be rejected. This does not however mean that we cannot have laws, rules, and covenants with each other. What it does mean is that we do not create a structure that empowers people to have power over others.
Does the church teach submission to the church leaders? Even the doctrines of past leaders? yes it does. Is that the teachings of Christ or the bible? They say so, I am not so sure. What we must remember is that what we see as the church now, is much much different than what we saw for the first few hundred years. In my opinion we see a very significant change in the church with the "conversion" of Constantine, and the legitimizing of Christianity in the early 300's. It was at that time that church became part of an unholy alliance of church and state. Where leaders in Christian community became men of power, and riches. Where the faith was codified and that codification was enforced. We have adopted a system that has mimicked government ever since. In this system, you obey in the chain of command, but this was not the early way.
The early church recognized people with giftings. Some people were good at leading, some at teaching, some at starting up new faith communities and so on. These individuals were sometimes but not often taken out of a "normal" life to be allowed to focus on these things. But in the church their opinions were just counted with double honor. They werent even "elected officials" The church community was to submit to the church community, not bishops or elders. But bishops and elders had a few more miles on their tires so their opinions held a bit more weight, which is all fair and good. The church did not submit to the Bishops and elders, the bishops and elders submitted to the church. Though like I said their opinion had extra weight, it was the community that was entrusted with power, not people.
We see this played out very well in the first council. There was a little controversy around circumcision. Those that were not born in the Hebrew culture were being pressured to be circumcised. Understandably, they said, "um... I like this Jesus dude, and I want to follow in the way, but is cutting off a piece of my junk really necessary?" Everyone got upset. So all of the churches sent some representatives to the church as Jerusalem. Why? Because they were the most well established and had the most people that actually had walked with Jesus? Nope, it was because the people causing the problems came from the churches in Jerusalem. They talked and argued. Now look at who was on the guest list? Peter, the rock of the church, James the actual brother of Jesus, Paul the guy who started most of the churches around the world and wrote most of the new testament, as well as a number of other apostles, bishops, ect. And what is the response?
"we the church at Jerusalem, (recognize that in this time the first mentioned person or group had more weight) and the apostles that are here with us want to clear this up. Sorry that these people from here made things all messy. But the church here would give you this advise" Now look at what we have, not hey we need to go to Jerusalem and appeal this all the way up to the supreme head honcho Peter the rock, work through the hierarchy and have an official proclamation that this is the Christian perspective on the matter! If you do not believe and practice this Peter declares you will not be going to heaven and are not "really" a Christian. No, we all got together and talked, in the end our community would give this advise to your's.
to me this is a different way of life, not hierarchy, but relationship, and empowerment. Not power over, power alongside.
rev
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Bio part 2
So while all of this was happening I got married to the best woman in
the world, Raquel, and we had two beautiful daughters. The interesting
thing is that we didn't pull away from our world, or our ministry to
focus on our family. We made sure our children were part of our lives,
that we didn't neglect them, but we also wanted them to grow up knowing
that the world is too big for it to revolve around them. Remember this
is a summation so as blunt as that sounds it was lived out in the midst
of caring, compassionate love.
Buddy Suitor at the leading of many people decided to move to another city and start a new church. Raquel and I went with him and were his youth pastors. Only there weren't many youth. We would hang out, get sodas, and talk. Slowly we wound up attracting a group of about thirty young people many if not most of whom did not have parents at the church. We did normal church stuff, went on church camps, and learned to love each other. This was very formative for us. When we had thirty kids in our group 27 came from broken homes. We were learning the healing power of community, and we were also learning what it meant to have an "open house".
I began learning about "cell groups" and "house churches" and how they were important because they taught community, involved everyone, and were the best mechanism for growth. (I will address this later, but at that time we still believed it was our call to convert everyone so they would not burn in hell forever, or the more pleasant way of looking at it was so they could go to heaven) I also realized that the man up front talking, while everyone else sat and listened was not a very healthy model.
Through much scheming we came up with a plan. We would start a church service that had "cool worship music", had a Christian rock band play a set, and then I would teach a very short message that is applicable to anyone whether they were Christian or not. The idea was to make a very fun night, where non Christian people would enjoy hanging out, and then through relationships with people in the group, not any altar call from the stage, people would be drawn into a relationship with Jesus and join our real church which was the small group.
It kinda worked. It wasn't long before we had a church full of people. Sometimes as many as 150 kids rocking out. Thing was they were all Christian kids from other churches. Took a lot of pain and soul searching before I realized that most Christian young people don't really want to hang out in church, why would someone who is not a Christian want to? So we shut it down for good.
We then took our youth group and started a church with them. It was a good thing, the church realized we were becoming something different, and they wanted a more traditional youth ministry. They helped us and blessed us, it was not a church split at all.
It was around this time I started understanding a bit more about how this all worked, why community was important. I began to understand that what Jesus was on about was more than just fire insurance, but teaching us a way of living that could change things in the here and now, not just later.
There were two major influences in this way of thinking. The first was the book "Anarchy and Christianity" by Jaques Ellul. This book really resonated with what I had seen and lived. It made sense, and seemed biblical to me as well. The other book was by Jan Hettinga, I think its title was Follow Me. This talked about the idea of the kingdom of God being the focus of Jesus message. Now Jan might be a bit upset at where I took all of that... but seeing that Jesus was talking about the kingdom of God as a present reality not just a future destination that really got me on a radical path.
We began to take steps in this direction. We tried to have less hierarchy. Less issues of power. We tried to see Jesus in community, in our neighborhood. It was a wonderful experience. Our first church plant was called the Belonging, and the name has set the tone for our whole life. We should be a community that allows people to belong.
I then began reading more and more Christian anarchist stuff, writings of Dorothy Day of the Catholic Worker, Tolstoy's the kingdom of God is within, and most influential to me was Dave Andrew's books "Christianarchy" and "Not Religion but Love". These latter two took all of the theory, and showed us how to live it out... well atleast how to fail gloriously trying to live it out :)
During this whole period of time we also were continually confronted with the fact that Jesus seemed to base his time on earth among the dispossessed, the poor, the marginalized. He talked about a down is up way of living. We began to see that a call to follow Jesus is a call towards downward mobility. Living sustainably on less, in an economy of enough. An economy that says there is enough for our need but not our greed.
Two more big influences on my life happened while we were in Australia. The first was a young man named Jarrod McKenna, who took me down the road of non-violence. I added to his voice the voices of Dorothy Day, Shane Claiborne, and Fr John Dear, as well as the crazy revolutionary activist Ciaron O'Reilly To love your enemies, and do good to those that do bad to you takes away the possibility of violent reaction.
The other was the works of Walter Wink in Engaging the Powers that speak much about non violence, but also the idea of spiritual warfare as seeing the spiritual behind the physical. This is very powerful because we begin to really see the corrupting influences of things like consumerism, individualism and nationalism.
Now we are living in Long Beach California, trying to sow all of these fragments together. How can we be an authentic community following Jesus, by entering into the plight of the oppressed, living simply, and non violently as we stand against a world system that is bent on destruction. Ched Myers is currently my mentor, and he seems perfectly suited for tying this all together, and we are so thankful for Ched and his wonderful wife Elaine Enns.
Things learned in part two:
the importance of community to growth as a human being
we weren't supposed to call people into the church, but live out the church in our neighborhoods
That just as Christ prioritized the marginalized, we should be found with them, standing for justice. Not reaching down to help, but climbing into solidarity.
That we are called not to have power over others, but to empower others
That we are called to be non violent resisters
that the kingdom of God is now and not yet, and we must be the change we want to see in the world as Gandhi put it
And that there are powerful forces in the world that shape policy, and even our own thoughts, and that these must be seen, and resisted.
Anyways, that was abrupt as could be, please feel free to ask any questions
rev
Buddy Suitor at the leading of many people decided to move to another city and start a new church. Raquel and I went with him and were his youth pastors. Only there weren't many youth. We would hang out, get sodas, and talk. Slowly we wound up attracting a group of about thirty young people many if not most of whom did not have parents at the church. We did normal church stuff, went on church camps, and learned to love each other. This was very formative for us. When we had thirty kids in our group 27 came from broken homes. We were learning the healing power of community, and we were also learning what it meant to have an "open house".
I began learning about "cell groups" and "house churches" and how they were important because they taught community, involved everyone, and were the best mechanism for growth. (I will address this later, but at that time we still believed it was our call to convert everyone so they would not burn in hell forever, or the more pleasant way of looking at it was so they could go to heaven) I also realized that the man up front talking, while everyone else sat and listened was not a very healthy model.
Through much scheming we came up with a plan. We would start a church service that had "cool worship music", had a Christian rock band play a set, and then I would teach a very short message that is applicable to anyone whether they were Christian or not. The idea was to make a very fun night, where non Christian people would enjoy hanging out, and then through relationships with people in the group, not any altar call from the stage, people would be drawn into a relationship with Jesus and join our real church which was the small group.
It kinda worked. It wasn't long before we had a church full of people. Sometimes as many as 150 kids rocking out. Thing was they were all Christian kids from other churches. Took a lot of pain and soul searching before I realized that most Christian young people don't really want to hang out in church, why would someone who is not a Christian want to? So we shut it down for good.
We then took our youth group and started a church with them. It was a good thing, the church realized we were becoming something different, and they wanted a more traditional youth ministry. They helped us and blessed us, it was not a church split at all.
It was around this time I started understanding a bit more about how this all worked, why community was important. I began to understand that what Jesus was on about was more than just fire insurance, but teaching us a way of living that could change things in the here and now, not just later.
There were two major influences in this way of thinking. The first was the book "Anarchy and Christianity" by Jaques Ellul. This book really resonated with what I had seen and lived. It made sense, and seemed biblical to me as well. The other book was by Jan Hettinga, I think its title was Follow Me. This talked about the idea of the kingdom of God being the focus of Jesus message. Now Jan might be a bit upset at where I took all of that... but seeing that Jesus was talking about the kingdom of God as a present reality not just a future destination that really got me on a radical path.
We began to take steps in this direction. We tried to have less hierarchy. Less issues of power. We tried to see Jesus in community, in our neighborhood. It was a wonderful experience. Our first church plant was called the Belonging, and the name has set the tone for our whole life. We should be a community that allows people to belong.
I then began reading more and more Christian anarchist stuff, writings of Dorothy Day of the Catholic Worker, Tolstoy's the kingdom of God is within, and most influential to me was Dave Andrew's books "Christianarchy" and "Not Religion but Love". These latter two took all of the theory, and showed us how to live it out... well atleast how to fail gloriously trying to live it out :)
During this whole period of time we also were continually confronted with the fact that Jesus seemed to base his time on earth among the dispossessed, the poor, the marginalized. He talked about a down is up way of living. We began to see that a call to follow Jesus is a call towards downward mobility. Living sustainably on less, in an economy of enough. An economy that says there is enough for our need but not our greed.
Two more big influences on my life happened while we were in Australia. The first was a young man named Jarrod McKenna, who took me down the road of non-violence. I added to his voice the voices of Dorothy Day, Shane Claiborne, and Fr John Dear, as well as the crazy revolutionary activist Ciaron O'Reilly To love your enemies, and do good to those that do bad to you takes away the possibility of violent reaction.
The other was the works of Walter Wink in Engaging the Powers that speak much about non violence, but also the idea of spiritual warfare as seeing the spiritual behind the physical. This is very powerful because we begin to really see the corrupting influences of things like consumerism, individualism and nationalism.
Now we are living in Long Beach California, trying to sow all of these fragments together. How can we be an authentic community following Jesus, by entering into the plight of the oppressed, living simply, and non violently as we stand against a world system that is bent on destruction. Ched Myers is currently my mentor, and he seems perfectly suited for tying this all together, and we are so thankful for Ched and his wonderful wife Elaine Enns.
Things learned in part two:
the importance of community to growth as a human being
we weren't supposed to call people into the church, but live out the church in our neighborhoods
That just as Christ prioritized the marginalized, we should be found with them, standing for justice. Not reaching down to help, but climbing into solidarity.
That we are called not to have power over others, but to empower others
That we are called to be non violent resisters
that the kingdom of God is now and not yet, and we must be the change we want to see in the world as Gandhi put it
And that there are powerful forces in the world that shape policy, and even our own thoughts, and that these must be seen, and resisted.
Anyways, that was abrupt as could be, please feel free to ask any questions
rev
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
My bio part 1
Here is the bio portion part 1,
John and Raquel and a couple of kids
Decided the make this in two parts, and to make it fairly brief. If anyone has any questions, please feel free to ask them. The truth is, the 27 year journey from born again, Pentecostal evangelical, conservative to post evangelical, house church, pacifist, Christian anarchist, is hard to "sum up". But I will do my best.
I was raised as a Easter and Christmas Catholic. We really didn't have that much to do with the church, but we did the minimum. Both of my parents were concerned that I got a good education however, so I went to Catholic Jr. and Sr. High School. Net effect on my spirituality? Not a whole lot, I learned a lot about church history, both the good and the bad, I learned the bible pretty well as we were tested on this, but as to how it effected how we lived our lives... well it didn't really. Even in our morality class the practical application was pretty void.
While I was in high school my mother started going to a pretty conservative, but a bit out there church. Every once and a while, to get in her good graces I would go, but again, not much impact. Then one Thursday night a gal from the "sister" church in Pasadena came out. I thought this girl was not hard on the eyes, and my mom saw a golden opportunity. She hosted a few "young adult" meetings at our house, and I asked this girl out. She said yes, and on our second date something very different happened.
It was a New Years Eve party, there were thirty to forty people there, and I was just amazed at the way they seemed to genuinely love and care for each other. And not only that, but they seemed to love and care for me as well. I liked that. Then at midnight they sat in a circle and talked about how they had seen God work in their lives the previous year. This was sometimes joyous, sometimes painful, and always honest. I was blown away. This actually was spiritual, it was real, it had practical implication, and I felt a "tugging" at my heart. By the time it was my turn to share, I had decided whatever they were into I wanted in on it. And that was my "conversion" story.
This is actually very important, as at a foundational point in my spiritual life it was not a traditional gathering, or ritual, but a group of people, meeting in a home, being honest about their lives, that made me take notice.
It wasn't long til I was listening to seven sermons a day on radio, reading countless books, and the bible from cover to cover. I wanted to be a preacher, and I was gonna be ready no matter what.
For some complicated reasons I wont get into here I wound up going to another church that was a bit more traditional in its structure, but not its ideology. The pastors there took me under their wing, and started mentoring me. Butch Pluimer and Buddy Suitor changed my life, they took me in like a son. This was another thing that was very formative. I was not sent away to bible college, but I was apprenticed. It was, lets just do it together, until you can do it alone.
At this church I really learned a lot. I learned some great stuff. I learned some not so great stuff. I learned about church politics, and what happens when people have "spiritual" power. I noticed it, but didn't understand it.
Then I met another great man. Dave Everritt was this very quiet humble man who came to me for prayer for his neighborhood. He lived in a ghetto that served as a war zone between two Latino gangs and three Cambodian gangs. The gang kids were starting to come to his bible studies and the church kids didn't like it, and he said he didn't know what to do but if he had to choose he was choosing the gang kids. I liked this guy and asked if I could come and see, and boy did I see. He had been a commodities broker with a porsche and a high priced condo, and when he became a Christian he sold it all, which caused his wife to leave him. Now years later he lived in this slum with his new wife trying to care for those most people were afraid of. He asked me if I wanted him to be my mentor. I said yes please.
So far in the story I have experienced a few things that are of note:
I experienced a practical, real, spirituality not part of a ritual, but part of community in a home.
I learned that apprenticeship and mentoring were of immense value.
I learned that people actually did take the call to get rid of it all and follow Jesus seriously.
I learned that social outreach need to go in and stay, not try to work from outside.
Part two will be tomorrow, and then we get into some of my more radical ideas :)
rev
John and Raquel and a couple of kids
Decided the make this in two parts, and to make it fairly brief. If anyone has any questions, please feel free to ask them. The truth is, the 27 year journey from born again, Pentecostal evangelical, conservative to post evangelical, house church, pacifist, Christian anarchist, is hard to "sum up". But I will do my best.
I was raised as a Easter and Christmas Catholic. We really didn't have that much to do with the church, but we did the minimum. Both of my parents were concerned that I got a good education however, so I went to Catholic Jr. and Sr. High School. Net effect on my spirituality? Not a whole lot, I learned a lot about church history, both the good and the bad, I learned the bible pretty well as we were tested on this, but as to how it effected how we lived our lives... well it didn't really. Even in our morality class the practical application was pretty void.
While I was in high school my mother started going to a pretty conservative, but a bit out there church. Every once and a while, to get in her good graces I would go, but again, not much impact. Then one Thursday night a gal from the "sister" church in Pasadena came out. I thought this girl was not hard on the eyes, and my mom saw a golden opportunity. She hosted a few "young adult" meetings at our house, and I asked this girl out. She said yes, and on our second date something very different happened.
It was a New Years Eve party, there were thirty to forty people there, and I was just amazed at the way they seemed to genuinely love and care for each other. And not only that, but they seemed to love and care for me as well. I liked that. Then at midnight they sat in a circle and talked about how they had seen God work in their lives the previous year. This was sometimes joyous, sometimes painful, and always honest. I was blown away. This actually was spiritual, it was real, it had practical implication, and I felt a "tugging" at my heart. By the time it was my turn to share, I had decided whatever they were into I wanted in on it. And that was my "conversion" story.
This is actually very important, as at a foundational point in my spiritual life it was not a traditional gathering, or ritual, but a group of people, meeting in a home, being honest about their lives, that made me take notice.
It wasn't long til I was listening to seven sermons a day on radio, reading countless books, and the bible from cover to cover. I wanted to be a preacher, and I was gonna be ready no matter what.
For some complicated reasons I wont get into here I wound up going to another church that was a bit more traditional in its structure, but not its ideology. The pastors there took me under their wing, and started mentoring me. Butch Pluimer and Buddy Suitor changed my life, they took me in like a son. This was another thing that was very formative. I was not sent away to bible college, but I was apprenticed. It was, lets just do it together, until you can do it alone.
At this church I really learned a lot. I learned some great stuff. I learned some not so great stuff. I learned about church politics, and what happens when people have "spiritual" power. I noticed it, but didn't understand it.
Then I met another great man. Dave Everritt was this very quiet humble man who came to me for prayer for his neighborhood. He lived in a ghetto that served as a war zone between two Latino gangs and three Cambodian gangs. The gang kids were starting to come to his bible studies and the church kids didn't like it, and he said he didn't know what to do but if he had to choose he was choosing the gang kids. I liked this guy and asked if I could come and see, and boy did I see. He had been a commodities broker with a porsche and a high priced condo, and when he became a Christian he sold it all, which caused his wife to leave him. Now years later he lived in this slum with his new wife trying to care for those most people were afraid of. He asked me if I wanted him to be my mentor. I said yes please.
So far in the story I have experienced a few things that are of note:
I experienced a practical, real, spirituality not part of a ritual, but part of community in a home.
I learned that apprenticeship and mentoring were of immense value.
I learned that people actually did take the call to get rid of it all and follow Jesus seriously.
I learned that social outreach need to go in and stay, not try to work from outside.
Part two will be tomorrow, and then we get into some of my more radical ideas :)
rev
Thursday, December 29, 2011
My Joyous life (follow up from yesterday)
I always find it discouraging that my negative posts always seem to get the most attention. People seem to be drawn to arguing, and critiquing and critiquing critiques. The most read posts on my blog are both where I call out Christian leaders for their very public statements letter to pastor mark and was very angry with pastor chuck.
Yet in some of my best posts I talk about wonderful people who have inspired me, and do inspire me pastor buddy or ray barbee
I share video bible studies, talk about our house church, all kinds of things. But the negative stuff gets heard, it gets passed around, mainly because people wish someone would say something about all the crap they see. They are happy that it is not just them. Others, well just enjoy stirring up some shit.
But today, I thought I might share a little bit about ways forward. How have we tried to live an alternative?
We work hard to define church as our community not as gatherings.
When we do gather everyone shares. Everyone cooks for the group at one time or another. We occasionally meet in other houses, or in a park. Everyone takes a turn at doing communion, leading confession, or prayer, or worship (almost never singing but usually interactive in a different way). Everyone shares during a discussion, and everyone has an opportunity to lead the discussions as well.
We pay nobody, so all the money that is given gets spent on neighborhood needs, using a relational model. If $50 or less is needed to help someone you personally know, you need one person in the community to agree that it is a need we should meet and the money is doled out. If it is above that amount we put it to a vote, and we use consent rather than consensus, (I will explain later)
We recognize that our calling is not to build a bigger community, but rather give birth to a network of small communities. We support, and help new communities start.
The use of consent is slightly different from consensus. We try to reach consensus, which we have in almost every occasion, but if we can't we ask the minority group to allow us to continue in the direction the majority has decided and we will review it in an appropriate amount of time. If they are adamant about saying no, then we wait. We would rather go together than divide over being right.
We put regular cycles of service to our neighbors, and the neighborhood into our calender. We learn to be disciples, by following Jesus example of loving those society has cast aside. In our history that has been homeless people, drug addicts, punk rockers, pregnant teens, and mentally ill people. Doing this together is important, as our friends learn what healthy community is like as we practice it with them.
There are many other things I could write, but I will stop there. I am currently writing a book that tells stories of our ministry over the years, with no commentary. It will not be negative at all. If you can't stand my critiques, maybe buy my book when it is available. Far from being the angry curmudgeon that I may appear in caricature, I love life, I have great hope for the future, and I believe the church will be reconciled and redeemed. I just happen to also believe I need to call us on our bullshit. Rest assured everything I say, I say to myself as well.
rev
Yet in some of my best posts I talk about wonderful people who have inspired me, and do inspire me pastor buddy or ray barbee
I share video bible studies, talk about our house church, all kinds of things. But the negative stuff gets heard, it gets passed around, mainly because people wish someone would say something about all the crap they see. They are happy that it is not just them. Others, well just enjoy stirring up some shit.
But today, I thought I might share a little bit about ways forward. How have we tried to live an alternative?
We work hard to define church as our community not as gatherings.
When we do gather everyone shares. Everyone cooks for the group at one time or another. We occasionally meet in other houses, or in a park. Everyone takes a turn at doing communion, leading confession, or prayer, or worship (almost never singing but usually interactive in a different way). Everyone shares during a discussion, and everyone has an opportunity to lead the discussions as well.
We pay nobody, so all the money that is given gets spent on neighborhood needs, using a relational model. If $50 or less is needed to help someone you personally know, you need one person in the community to agree that it is a need we should meet and the money is doled out. If it is above that amount we put it to a vote, and we use consent rather than consensus, (I will explain later)
We recognize that our calling is not to build a bigger community, but rather give birth to a network of small communities. We support, and help new communities start.
The use of consent is slightly different from consensus. We try to reach consensus, which we have in almost every occasion, but if we can't we ask the minority group to allow us to continue in the direction the majority has decided and we will review it in an appropriate amount of time. If they are adamant about saying no, then we wait. We would rather go together than divide over being right.
We put regular cycles of service to our neighbors, and the neighborhood into our calender. We learn to be disciples, by following Jesus example of loving those society has cast aside. In our history that has been homeless people, drug addicts, punk rockers, pregnant teens, and mentally ill people. Doing this together is important, as our friends learn what healthy community is like as we practice it with them.
There are many other things I could write, but I will stop there. I am currently writing a book that tells stories of our ministry over the years, with no commentary. It will not be negative at all. If you can't stand my critiques, maybe buy my book when it is available. Far from being the angry curmudgeon that I may appear in caricature, I love life, I have great hope for the future, and I believe the church will be reconciled and redeemed. I just happen to also believe I need to call us on our bullshit. Rest assured everything I say, I say to myself as well.
rev
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
If you build it they will come (my sad little world!!!)
I responded to a twitter message that was retweeted by someone I follow. The message went something like... 80 percent of non churched people said they would go to a Christmas service if invited so get out there and invite someone.
My response was something along the lines of "why? so we can inoculate them with a small dose of consumer Christianity that keeps them from catching a real cross following discipleship?" Which I know is a bit harsh, but I am a bit harsh sometimes.
A brief conversation followed which ended in a statement that basically said, "I am not going to let you drag me into your sad little world"
Now, first of all I understand the issue. I seem like a scrooge. I seem like someone that hates the church. I seem like someone who is taking pot shots at those doing something different, or arguably more successful than what I am. I can see that, really I can. But... I do not think I should be dismissed so easily.
Not that I am in any way comparing myself to any of these great men of the faith, but John the baptist wasn't exactly a sweet heart, Paul was down right mean sometimes, even Jesus whom we follow was a killjoy on occasions. The entire tradition of the prophets is not to say nice things, but to actually be a big downer. So the question isn't: is what I am saying negative?, but rather: is what I am saying true?
Christianity as it has become defined in the western world, is subverted. It is not the revolutionary, radical and sacrificial way of living that we see in the book of acts and in stories of the early church. It has become rather a culture of its own, that mimics the culture of its day. And unfortunately in most of the western world that means an adoption of consumerism. We make a product of Christianity. This product includes well put together services, with good music, good message, and good child care. The product includes a very well put together handbook of beliefs, that we can convince ourselves of, and then be suitable for heaven. This product in too many cases gives us an ideology that says our possessions are a sign of God's blessing, that our Christian duty is to take care of ourselves and our family first and then if we have some extra to give it through an agency to those that might need some help.
I remember one time I was sitting in a service that was all about God's plan for sexuality. It had drama, and video, and a nice compelling message. And then the band came out and was playing "in your eyes" by Peter Gabriel, and I leaned over to ask my friend that invited me a question about the service. A lady in front of us angrily told me I was being a distraction. A distraction from what? A song you hear a hundred times a week on the radio? I was distracting from a performance that was meant to be a consumable good, for a target market. I was distracting from church, but not from being the church, but from the product of church. Inviting people to purchase this product is not mission, though it is what we are asked to do by the organization that exists.
Jesus on the other hand calls us to go out into the world, not call people to us. He says to make disciples, not converts. And he says to teach them to obey everything he taught... which means, sell all you have and give it to the poor, store not up treasures for yourself on earth, feed the hungry, cloth the naked, visit the imprisoned and sick, stand up non violently against oppression, love your enemies don't bomb them, live out the kingdom of heaven. Yes, Jesus calls us to something all together different than a service on Christmas.
We don't need to invite people to a service, we need to invite them to a revolution. But first we have to live it ourselves. Far from being a sad little world, it becomes a wonderful, joy filled, and also tragic world, bigger than can be imagined, as it is not bound by the physical.
come and join the revolution
rev
My response was something along the lines of "why? so we can inoculate them with a small dose of consumer Christianity that keeps them from catching a real cross following discipleship?" Which I know is a bit harsh, but I am a bit harsh sometimes.
A brief conversation followed which ended in a statement that basically said, "I am not going to let you drag me into your sad little world"
Now, first of all I understand the issue. I seem like a scrooge. I seem like someone that hates the church. I seem like someone who is taking pot shots at those doing something different, or arguably more successful than what I am. I can see that, really I can. But... I do not think I should be dismissed so easily.
Not that I am in any way comparing myself to any of these great men of the faith, but John the baptist wasn't exactly a sweet heart, Paul was down right mean sometimes, even Jesus whom we follow was a killjoy on occasions. The entire tradition of the prophets is not to say nice things, but to actually be a big downer. So the question isn't: is what I am saying negative?, but rather: is what I am saying true?
Christianity as it has become defined in the western world, is subverted. It is not the revolutionary, radical and sacrificial way of living that we see in the book of acts and in stories of the early church. It has become rather a culture of its own, that mimics the culture of its day. And unfortunately in most of the western world that means an adoption of consumerism. We make a product of Christianity. This product includes well put together services, with good music, good message, and good child care. The product includes a very well put together handbook of beliefs, that we can convince ourselves of, and then be suitable for heaven. This product in too many cases gives us an ideology that says our possessions are a sign of God's blessing, that our Christian duty is to take care of ourselves and our family first and then if we have some extra to give it through an agency to those that might need some help.
I remember one time I was sitting in a service that was all about God's plan for sexuality. It had drama, and video, and a nice compelling message. And then the band came out and was playing "in your eyes" by Peter Gabriel, and I leaned over to ask my friend that invited me a question about the service. A lady in front of us angrily told me I was being a distraction. A distraction from what? A song you hear a hundred times a week on the radio? I was distracting from a performance that was meant to be a consumable good, for a target market. I was distracting from church, but not from being the church, but from the product of church. Inviting people to purchase this product is not mission, though it is what we are asked to do by the organization that exists.
Jesus on the other hand calls us to go out into the world, not call people to us. He says to make disciples, not converts. And he says to teach them to obey everything he taught... which means, sell all you have and give it to the poor, store not up treasures for yourself on earth, feed the hungry, cloth the naked, visit the imprisoned and sick, stand up non violently against oppression, love your enemies don't bomb them, live out the kingdom of heaven. Yes, Jesus calls us to something all together different than a service on Christmas.
We don't need to invite people to a service, we need to invite them to a revolution. But first we have to live it ourselves. Far from being a sad little world, it becomes a wonderful, joy filled, and also tragic world, bigger than can be imagined, as it is not bound by the physical.
come and join the revolution
rev
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Matthew 26 the woman with the expensive perfume
might take a few days on this, important stuff here.
10 Aware of this, Jesus said to them, “Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a beautiful thing to me. 11 The poor you will always have with you,[a] but you will not always have me. 12 When she poured this perfume on my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. 13 Truly I tell you, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.”
Again context is very important. This story follows Jesus railing against the pharisees and priests and powers that be in Jerusalem. Jesus tells parables about the powerful destroying those that stand against their oppressive policies, and about the judgment where we are called into account for how we treat the poor and the marginalized. Then we see a quick passage that tells us the countdown to His death has begun, and then to this story.
In this story we have a woman that finds in Jesus a man that has loved and accepted her, that has shown her the light, the way and is the very fullness of truth. And she shows her love and adoration in an extremely generous manner. Then the very people who listened to Jesus talk about the care for the poor, and how we must stand against the oppressive powers are shocked at the waste. It doesn't seem to make sense with what Jesus just said. Why don't we use that perfume to feed poor people (notice there is an understanding at least among Jesus disciples that this woman was one of their community, and part of their common purse collective, and expected some accountability). Jesus says the poor you will always have with you, and I will deal with that statement in a later post, but then explains, "she wanted to do a generous act towards me, and it will most likely be her last chance to do so as I am going to be murdered soon, its a good thing she did"
The moral of the story is simply this: we can sometimes get so caught up in all the right stuff, and doing all the right things, that we forget people and their importance. All of our veganism, new monasticism, incarnational mission, activism and non violence can all be derailed when we forget that its the people that matter. Its people over principles. Sometimes we need to throw a party and waste money that can go other places... because its good to celebrate a person, a relationship, a milestone. Sometimes we can spend a bit too much money to show some one we love them. We don't need to worry that "oh you are buying into that evil consumeristic mindset that says you show your love by buying something". Check your heart, don't use this as an excuse, it should be an exception not the rule, but guys... love extravagantly, enjoy, don't become bitter curmudgeons.
Next I will tell a few stories about how this has worked out in our lives and then I will talk about the statement the poor you will have with you always.
rev
Jesus Anointed at Bethany
6 While Jesus was in Bethany in the home of Simon the Leper, 7 a woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, which she poured on his head as he was reclining at the table. 8 When the disciples saw this, they were indignant. “Why this waste?” they asked. 9 “This perfume could have been sold at a high price and the money given to the poor.”10 Aware of this, Jesus said to them, “Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a beautiful thing to me. 11 The poor you will always have with you,[a] but you will not always have me. 12 When she poured this perfume on my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. 13 Truly I tell you, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.”
Again context is very important. This story follows Jesus railing against the pharisees and priests and powers that be in Jerusalem. Jesus tells parables about the powerful destroying those that stand against their oppressive policies, and about the judgment where we are called into account for how we treat the poor and the marginalized. Then we see a quick passage that tells us the countdown to His death has begun, and then to this story.
In this story we have a woman that finds in Jesus a man that has loved and accepted her, that has shown her the light, the way and is the very fullness of truth. And she shows her love and adoration in an extremely generous manner. Then the very people who listened to Jesus talk about the care for the poor, and how we must stand against the oppressive powers are shocked at the waste. It doesn't seem to make sense with what Jesus just said. Why don't we use that perfume to feed poor people (notice there is an understanding at least among Jesus disciples that this woman was one of their community, and part of their common purse collective, and expected some accountability). Jesus says the poor you will always have with you, and I will deal with that statement in a later post, but then explains, "she wanted to do a generous act towards me, and it will most likely be her last chance to do so as I am going to be murdered soon, its a good thing she did"
The moral of the story is simply this: we can sometimes get so caught up in all the right stuff, and doing all the right things, that we forget people and their importance. All of our veganism, new monasticism, incarnational mission, activism and non violence can all be derailed when we forget that its the people that matter. Its people over principles. Sometimes we need to throw a party and waste money that can go other places... because its good to celebrate a person, a relationship, a milestone. Sometimes we can spend a bit too much money to show some one we love them. We don't need to worry that "oh you are buying into that evil consumeristic mindset that says you show your love by buying something". Check your heart, don't use this as an excuse, it should be an exception not the rule, but guys... love extravagantly, enjoy, don't become bitter curmudgeons.
Next I will tell a few stories about how this has worked out in our lives and then I will talk about the statement the poor you will have with you always.
rev
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Is the social gospel creating another group of outcasts?
A good friend of mine Phil Shepherd has suggested that the social gospel, or what I call liberation theology, creates another group of marginalized people. When we concentrate on the poor and marginalized, and preach an incarnational approach to working alongside of them, we will alienate, and make marginal those that are not poor, those that are not willing to give up the security of wealthy living, or even upper middle class life.
Well let me start out by saying a few things. First off I do completely believe in the social gospel, or liberation theology. I believe that we should focus on the poor, that it is not only a calling but sacramentally mandated for all. I believe that this is part and parcel of the kingdom of heaven, or empire of heaven, or economy of God. It is part of our discipleship, not a "special calling" for certain people.
Secondly, Phil is one hundred percent correct. If you believe and practice this ethic, you will alienate people. You will marginalize people. You will scandalize people. You will trade one group of rejects, for another. This is the truth, I am not going to deny it, nor try and make an excuse as to why it is not true.
But let me address this issue. God's love expressed in the "good news" of the kingdom of God, is not the same good news to all people. Because to some, God's kingdom is a deliverance from slavery. To others, it is a deliverance from mastery. For some it is a economy of life giving care and deliverance, and for others it is a radical call towards sacrifice. I would say that it is good news in both circumstances, but it may not seem so for the one who is called to the good news of sacrifice. The rich young ruler who was told to give up all of his prestige, security and wealth, to join the new world of discipleship, did not take the gospel as good news at all. He saw it as incredibly bad news, news he could not accept. And he was marginalized.
In fact Jesus seems to have no problem marginalizing people. Calling people sons of the devil, white washed tombs and poisonous snakes is not exactly welcoming and affirming language. Jesus had no problems drawing lines in the sand, and saying, you are not among us, and if you don't change you will by the very nature of your life draw judgment upon yourselves. Jesus created a marginalized class.
In fact a careful examination of some of the passages dealing with hell, are a perfect case for this. In the New Testament we find a few words for the English translation hell, but the predominant ones are hades, and Gehenna (the lake of fire). But when Jesus is talking about Gehenna, as the final destination of some people, he is not doing it in an other worldly context. There was a trash dump outside of the city called Gehenna. It was kept burning at all times (eternal fire), there was a constant influx of maggots and worms (the worm was not quenched) and dogs fought over what was found there (gnashing of teeth). If you were poor, a sinner, a race traitor (tax collector), ritually unclean, or a gentile, you were not buried in a Jewish cemetery, but your body would be dragged out and thrown into Gehenna. Jesus now addresses the rich, the powerful, the holy, the people that would never be thrown into the marginalized trash dump, and says if they don't repent, they will find themselves in the place where the marginalized are thrown. In other words, Jesus flips it. You who are looking forward to a place of peace and rest, are actually judged as unworthy in the eyes of God because of your status. This is radical, this could be called class warfare very easily. But it is also the gospel story.
So what do I say to my friend Phil? Yes, the discipleship I follow leads to marginalization of others. But does this mean that God does not love, nor care for these others? no, not at all. He wants to save them from their lifestyles that will not work in the future kingdom of God.
Isn't it the same thing, marginalizing one group is just as bad as marginalizing another? No, it isn't. Because unlike the lgbtq community, the poor, the racially vilified, the mentally ill or whatever other group you are talking about, the rich, the powerful, and the secure, can easily move out of their position, into one of solidarity. The rich can become one with the poor, and in the process be generous, and helpful. But the poor cannot just decide to be rich.
So what does all this mean? The truth is I am rich compared to many in this world. It means I am on a journey towards simplicity, and sustainability. My issue is never with those on a journey, but those defending their positions, which keep them complicit in the kingdom of the world.
rev
Well let me start out by saying a few things. First off I do completely believe in the social gospel, or liberation theology. I believe that we should focus on the poor, that it is not only a calling but sacramentally mandated for all. I believe that this is part and parcel of the kingdom of heaven, or empire of heaven, or economy of God. It is part of our discipleship, not a "special calling" for certain people.
Secondly, Phil is one hundred percent correct. If you believe and practice this ethic, you will alienate people. You will marginalize people. You will scandalize people. You will trade one group of rejects, for another. This is the truth, I am not going to deny it, nor try and make an excuse as to why it is not true.
But let me address this issue. God's love expressed in the "good news" of the kingdom of God, is not the same good news to all people. Because to some, God's kingdom is a deliverance from slavery. To others, it is a deliverance from mastery. For some it is a economy of life giving care and deliverance, and for others it is a radical call towards sacrifice. I would say that it is good news in both circumstances, but it may not seem so for the one who is called to the good news of sacrifice. The rich young ruler who was told to give up all of his prestige, security and wealth, to join the new world of discipleship, did not take the gospel as good news at all. He saw it as incredibly bad news, news he could not accept. And he was marginalized.
In fact Jesus seems to have no problem marginalizing people. Calling people sons of the devil, white washed tombs and poisonous snakes is not exactly welcoming and affirming language. Jesus had no problems drawing lines in the sand, and saying, you are not among us, and if you don't change you will by the very nature of your life draw judgment upon yourselves. Jesus created a marginalized class.
In fact a careful examination of some of the passages dealing with hell, are a perfect case for this. In the New Testament we find a few words for the English translation hell, but the predominant ones are hades, and Gehenna (the lake of fire). But when Jesus is talking about Gehenna, as the final destination of some people, he is not doing it in an other worldly context. There was a trash dump outside of the city called Gehenna. It was kept burning at all times (eternal fire), there was a constant influx of maggots and worms (the worm was not quenched) and dogs fought over what was found there (gnashing of teeth). If you were poor, a sinner, a race traitor (tax collector), ritually unclean, or a gentile, you were not buried in a Jewish cemetery, but your body would be dragged out and thrown into Gehenna. Jesus now addresses the rich, the powerful, the holy, the people that would never be thrown into the marginalized trash dump, and says if they don't repent, they will find themselves in the place where the marginalized are thrown. In other words, Jesus flips it. You who are looking forward to a place of peace and rest, are actually judged as unworthy in the eyes of God because of your status. This is radical, this could be called class warfare very easily. But it is also the gospel story.
So what do I say to my friend Phil? Yes, the discipleship I follow leads to marginalization of others. But does this mean that God does not love, nor care for these others? no, not at all. He wants to save them from their lifestyles that will not work in the future kingdom of God.
Isn't it the same thing, marginalizing one group is just as bad as marginalizing another? No, it isn't. Because unlike the lgbtq community, the poor, the racially vilified, the mentally ill or whatever other group you are talking about, the rich, the powerful, and the secure, can easily move out of their position, into one of solidarity. The rich can become one with the poor, and in the process be generous, and helpful. But the poor cannot just decide to be rich.
So what does all this mean? The truth is I am rich compared to many in this world. It means I am on a journey towards simplicity, and sustainability. My issue is never with those on a journey, but those defending their positions, which keep them complicit in the kingdom of the world.
rev
Friday, September 02, 2011
Radical Discipleship (is there any other kind?)
My friend Simon Moyle (non-violence teacher and activist, Jesus follower), wrote an interesting article yesterday, or actually today since he is ahead of us by 14 or so hours. READ HERE In it he asks the question as to weather you can be a "casual" disciple. Or whether you can separate those that have a "special" calling, from those that are supposed to live a fairly normal life and maybe support some of these radicals.
Now Simon is way more "radical" than I. And there are other folk that are more radical than he. Its not a competition, but an orientation towards following the radical, revolutionary Jesus.
My whole life I have been a bit of a radical. I would jump off the top of the monkey bars in kindergarden, just because it was scary. I bull fought at 15 years of age. I skateboarded in swimming pools and vert ramps, and was a mma fighter. I like radical, I am inclined towards radical. And I naturally would place this inclination towards my faith.
Following that reasoning, I wanted to live in South Central, or North Long Beach, or some where really "hardcore", when we returned to America. I really want to be... radical. But the truth is, most of this is my ego. Ego and pride are not the way of Jesus. Through a series of dreams and the interpretations of these dreams by community members, and circumstance, we wind up in a neighborhood that is in between, not hardcore, but not sleepy suberbs. The Popeyes chicken on the corner does have bullet proof glass, but we don't have gang violence next door. And I am convinced we are where we are meant to be. And we are living as faithfully as we can to the radical call of Jesus in our present place. We are sharing our breakfast on Sundays with the homeless in the park, we are cultivating a small community garden, we are living in a shared housing situation, learning more about open purse living. We are doing stuff that is heading in the direction of radical, and to be honest, we want to be more so.
So, what is my point? My point I guess is this: Following Jesus is a journey, and it is our direction that is really the point. There are differing gifts, and differing applications. We will not all look like Jarrod McKenna, Shane Claiborne, or Simon Moyle. But we cannot stop our journey by saying, "well I am just not called to that" Ours should be, for everyone of us, a constant challenge towards a more complete following of Jesus, which calls us to radical love, radical confronting of the powers, radical opposition to oppression, and radical deconstruction of the kingdoms of this world. It is this orientation towards becoming more like Jesus, that is the goal.
So for some of us that are out on the fringe, the truth is most likely that we have embraced this crazy discipleship maybe sooner, maybe through our personality, or maybe because of great teaching and mentors, and we need to stand strong in our calling. But in that we need to gently call people to take steps in the direction of Jesus, and His radical cross carrying way, with lots of grace and encouragement. NO ONE, INCLUDING THOSE "RADICAL DISCIPLES" CAN STAY WHERE THEY ARE, WE ARE ALL CALLED TO KEEP DRAWING EVERY CLOSER TO JESUS AND THE WAY OF THE CROSS
I hope that makes some sense
rev
Now Simon is way more "radical" than I. And there are other folk that are more radical than he. Its not a competition, but an orientation towards following the radical, revolutionary Jesus.
My whole life I have been a bit of a radical. I would jump off the top of the monkey bars in kindergarden, just because it was scary. I bull fought at 15 years of age. I skateboarded in swimming pools and vert ramps, and was a mma fighter. I like radical, I am inclined towards radical. And I naturally would place this inclination towards my faith.
Following that reasoning, I wanted to live in South Central, or North Long Beach, or some where really "hardcore", when we returned to America. I really want to be... radical. But the truth is, most of this is my ego. Ego and pride are not the way of Jesus. Through a series of dreams and the interpretations of these dreams by community members, and circumstance, we wind up in a neighborhood that is in between, not hardcore, but not sleepy suberbs. The Popeyes chicken on the corner does have bullet proof glass, but we don't have gang violence next door. And I am convinced we are where we are meant to be. And we are living as faithfully as we can to the radical call of Jesus in our present place. We are sharing our breakfast on Sundays with the homeless in the park, we are cultivating a small community garden, we are living in a shared housing situation, learning more about open purse living. We are doing stuff that is heading in the direction of radical, and to be honest, we want to be more so.
So, what is my point? My point I guess is this: Following Jesus is a journey, and it is our direction that is really the point. There are differing gifts, and differing applications. We will not all look like Jarrod McKenna, Shane Claiborne, or Simon Moyle. But we cannot stop our journey by saying, "well I am just not called to that" Ours should be, for everyone of us, a constant challenge towards a more complete following of Jesus, which calls us to radical love, radical confronting of the powers, radical opposition to oppression, and radical deconstruction of the kingdoms of this world. It is this orientation towards becoming more like Jesus, that is the goal.
So for some of us that are out on the fringe, the truth is most likely that we have embraced this crazy discipleship maybe sooner, maybe through our personality, or maybe because of great teaching and mentors, and we need to stand strong in our calling. But in that we need to gently call people to take steps in the direction of Jesus, and His radical cross carrying way, with lots of grace and encouragement. NO ONE, INCLUDING THOSE "RADICAL DISCIPLES" CAN STAY WHERE THEY ARE, WE ARE ALL CALLED TO KEEP DRAWING EVERY CLOSER TO JESUS AND THE WAY OF THE CROSS
I hope that makes some sense
rev
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
