Reflections on “In The Name of Jesus”

This is a short reflection on insights I took from Henri Nouwen’s brief yet brilliant book, In The Name of Jesus.  Its not a review, so if some of it doesnt seem to connect, or even if it does connect, I recommend you read the meditation on servant leadership.

Nouwen’s opening  section, after the introduction, is particularly valuable to me because I have long been struggling with the need to be relevant in my own life and ministry. Like Nouwen I am caught up in the lie that “I” have something to offer; I mean who really gives a damn if I have some higher level degrees, or preach at congregations around the world or have an above average IQ? No one cares about that, they care about being loved so that they can open themselves up to be loving. Like Nouwen, I have found that this is most apparent when I am with the poor in Spirit; when I am sitting the park with my homeless friends, or hanging out with inner city kids. I am drawn to the truth in Nouwen’s words, “These broken, wounded, and completely unpretentious people forced me to let go of my relevant self – the self that can do things, show things, prove things, build things – and forced me to reclaim the unadorned self in which I am completely vulnerable, open to receive and give love regardless of any accomplishments.” (28) I said that “I” have nothing to offer, but perhaps it is exactly “I” or grammatically correct, me, that I must offer in all vulnerability as Jesus did. As Nouwen astutely points out, this can only happen when I have “an ardent desire to dwell in God’s presence, to listen to God’s voice, to look at God’s beauty, to touch God’s incarnate Word, and to take fully God’s infinite goodness.”(43)

Another insight that Nouwen offers throughout the book, especially in the beginning of the second section, is that when one is willing to move from Harvard to L’Arche, suburbs to inner city or from heaven to earth then one must face the pain of loss, maybe of death, to gain the reward of renewal and resurrection. I hate pain, but I love gain. This is a terrible condition to have if one wants to be like Jesus, yet it is this reticence in the face of potential suffering coupled with my prevailing desire to be noteworthy that I have found to be at the very core of my own being. Again Nouwen expresses my sentiments in a much more poetic and brilliant way, “I came to see that I had lived most of my life as a tightrope artist trying to walk on high, thin cable from one tower to the other, always waiting for the applause when I had not fallen off and broken my leg.”(53) I want the applause, I crave it, but I will avoid the fall at nearly any cost.

Nouwen says, “The way of the Christian leader is not the way of upward mobility in which our world has invested so much, but the way of downward mobility ending at the cross.”(81-82) In reply, out of my own frustration I say “dammit.” Like a child I whine, “I don’t want to” or “you can’t make me.” Though I know he is absolutely right in this assessment, and some part of me wants to cheer for this truth; I can’t help but wonder just how much ‘everything’ Christ really means I need to give up to follow him. I am learning that a life of simplicity in the Western world in which I find myself may only be possible as a result of miraculous divine intervention. I struggle more because Nouwen suggests that deep theological reflection is the key to living such a life, but he goes on to say that seminaries and divinity schools should be the primary place where this takes place. To me that seems somewhat contradictory, because most seminaries only take the best and the brightest, and those that have enough money for an education. How does this in any way look downwardly mobile? Yet, this is exactly where I find myself as I try to know God more; as I try to understand Christ and his cross and what it means to take up my own and follow him.

I am at a bit of an impasse as I consider how I may keep these insights in front of me, because there is some way in which they are all already in my heart, yet there is another sense in which I am well aware that my life will often crowd them out. I believe that Nouwen’s insights came from a life, as he suggests, of prayer, theological reflection, and service. This leads me to believe that I must dedicate my life to these very practices in order to keep them in front of me. The only way to keep these truths present in my life is to live them, but the irony is that it is living that usually pushes them away. May God have mercy on me!

I dont recommend too many books these days, perhaps because I read so many that they get all jumbled together, but I implore you to pick up this short yet extremely moving book. Nouwen’s words have blessed me and I trust they will bless you too.

Poverty and Advent

Its rare for me to hear a new Christian song these days that really hits me right in the gut, but today in Chapel I was introduced to just such a song. The service was focusing on the eschatological hope that we have in the birth of Jesus and his  return, and the lives we should live as a result. This song, by Jason Upton, closed out the service.

There’s a power in poverty that breaks principalities
And brings the authority’s down to their knees
There’s a brewing frustration and ageless temptation
To fight for control by some manipulation

But the God of the kingdoms and the God of the Nations
The God of creation sends his revelation
Thru the homeless and penniless Jesus the son
The poor will inherit the Kingdom to come

Where will we turn when our world falls apart
And all of the treasures we’ve stored in our barns
Can’t buy the Kingdom of God?

Who will we praise when we’ve praised all our lives
men who build Kingdoms and men who build fame but heaven does not know their names

What will we fear when all that remains
Is God on His throne, with a child in his arms,
and love in his eyes
And the sound of his heart cries

You should have heard my buddy Drew sing it as well. It echoed through the chapel and straight into the hearts of my fellow journeyers and I.

Human Trafficking Conference- NFS Video

This very short video, from last weeks Forum On Human Trafficking, powerfully conveys the message that slavery and human trafficking are a grave reality in our world, even this very day. Watch it, then check out my previous post to see what you can do about it.

Human Trafficking Conference- Helpful Links

So far today the most useful presentation was about monitoring supply changes. It was especially helpful because several organizations’ websites were given out, from groups that advocate on behalf of the poor to consumer watchdog groups to grass roots movements.

Here are the links and a brief description about each. I hope you find these to be informative and inspiring. This an issue that the church must find itself combating as a part of our witness as Jesus, the One who befriended the lowest of the low.

The International Labor Rights Forum is a nonprofit advocacy organization dedicated to achieving just and humane treatment for workers worldwide. They also provide information about the labor practices of various companies and even information about labor laws around the world.

The Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility seeks to encourage businesses to act in a socially responsible way.

MADE-BY is an independent consumer label for fashion companies who continuously improve and are transparent about the social, economic and ecological conditions throughout the whole supply chain of their collections.

The Not For Sale Campaign equips and mobilizes Smart Activists to deploy innovative solutions to re-abolish slavery in their own backyards and across the globe.

International Justice Mission is a human rights agency that secures justice for victims of slavery, sexual exploitation and other forms of violent oppression.

Proxy Democracy is an organization that helps investors find companies that have ethical practices and connect to other investors to work synergistically to open information streams and encourage corporations to be ethical.

The Story of Stuff creatively chronicles the underside of our production and consumption patterns, and exposes the connections between a huge number of environmental and social issues, and calls us together to create a more sustainable and just world. It’ll teach you something, it’ll make you laugh, and it just may change the way you look at all the stuff in your life forever.

Free 2 Work provides a databaseof companies from around the world so you can independently search, report, and verify known labor practices. This one may be particularly helpful as we try to decide what products to buy.

Responsible Shopper reports on global research and campaign information regarding the impact of major corporations on human rights, social justice, environmental sustainability and more.

The Good Guide provides the world’s largest and most reliable source of information on the health, environmental, and social impacts of the products in your home. This means you can find out if your products were made by forced labor or with environmentally harmful materials and processes.

The Trade Observatory works with organizations around the world to analyze how global trade agreements impact domestic farm and food policies. Alongside a global coalition, and advocates for fair trade policies that promote strong health standards, labor and human rights, the environment and, most fundamentally, democratic institutions.

Earth Rights International combats human rights violations through advocation, organization, education and litigation.

Chain Store Reaction provides information about tons of brands and provides an easy opportunity to contact these companies to encourage them to investigate and end slavery in their supply chains.

I believe that when Jesus said he came to set the captives free that he didnt just free their souls for heaven, he showed with his life that he came to set people free from the slavery of poverty and greed and abuse and oppression as well. Join the Carpenter from Nazareth and take part in freeing slaves and acting in a restorative and redemptive way in this world. No more excuses!!!

Human Trafficking Conference- Day One

We arrived at the church and I confess I am already frustrated. This place is a mall, only nicer. I wonder how much money was spent on the fancy decorations and lighting and sound equipment. I also noticed that over 90% of the people here are white, probably middle or upper middle class, attractive,  wearing plastered on smiles. I too am these things, perhaps sans the attractiveness and permanent smile. Where are the blacks, the Asians, the natives and the Hispanics? Where are the poor? Where are the oppressed, impoverished? People are dressed in outfits that are worth more than my car. Is it all a façade? Is it a way to make ourselves feel good about our convictions and conscience? Are we just trying to create meaning in a world that often seems so meaningless? I am guilty too. Lots of words, and anger and guilt for the injustice around me, but very little action, maybe even less serious prayer. How do the wealthy, educated, affluent and powerful combat widespread systemic injustices? Do we meet in million dollar church buildings patting each other on the back and raising awareness or is there something more to this? How do we speak truth to power when we are the powerful?

On another note, this morning we met and had a formation in common session with just our group. We started with 15 minutes of silence, which was uncomfortable yet peaceful. The we read together from the Asbury reader and discussed, Lectio Divina style, what the text was speaking to us. Mostly I took away that I need to just rest in the peace of God’s presence and the joy of his salvation, but now I am struggling with how that is tempered with God’s lament over our condition, especially our unawareness of the fetters of wealth, comfort, self-righteousness and homogeneity that bind our souls and keep them from soaring. I want to live and work with joy and peace, but I also want to feel the sense of outrage that I believe God feels when he sees a bunch of rich white folks bantering about changing the world in our million dollar facilities when our battle should be more in the trenches.

God, I am sorry if I am being judgemental. I am simply trying to express what I see and feel. Help me love church folks. Help me love myself. Help me love in a way that I see the image of God in those who trying so hard to create it in themselves. Help me love myself. Help me love those who only fight injustice from the safety of their pew and the comfort of being a safe distance from the bleeding hands and feet and human slaves. Help me love myself. Help me love those who shed rivers of tears on behalf of the oppressed but never shed any blood. Help me love myself. Help me love the readers and speakers, those full of knowledge and vision but lacking in practice and lifestyles of redemptive suffering and love. Help me love myself. Help me love, Lord, help me love.

As I hear the speakers give their various spiels I am much more encouraged, but still skeptical about what each of us does when we leave this place. I love the creative ideas been tossed about and the deep concern on behalf of the presenters. I am impressed with the fact that more people than I would have imagined are actually getting their hands dirty. However, I am wary about the ideas being put forth that we msut somehow depend on law or government to end these atrocities. This simply isn’t true. I don’t think it comes down to prosecutions or threats or coercion. The change we seek can only come through changed lives and hearts. I don’t think it’s the governments job, its our job to see this through. We arent ultimately aiming to end slavery, we are seeking to particpate in and promote the new humanity of God’s kingdom. Prosecution isn’t the answer. Love is.

Some of the quotes that stuck out to me are

“People are willing to leave their theology at the door to come together and combat this issue.” We cannot and must not leave our theology at the door because it informs our actions.

“We should aim to make these grass roots movements a part of the establishment.” Really?!?!

I know some of these thoughts may be a bit disjointed, but there is so much information being thrown at us and I havent had much time to process and reflect on most of it. Look for more to come.

Human Trafficking Conference- Travel

I was given the chance to travel with a group from Asbury to the Global Conference on Human Trafficking in Carlsbad, California. Here are some of my thoughts from the trip to California. There will be more thoughts and reflections from the conference from myself and others in our group.

As we are flying to a conference on one of the great atrocities of our day, of any day, I cant help but wonder how my own lust, addictions, indulgences and apathy have contributed to the brokenness of this world where people think it is ok to own another human being for their own pleasure. How has my falleness rippled out in both the physical and spiritual realms, empowering the evil one and his minions while galvanizing the chains that hold his enemies, oppressed and oppressors, in bondage? Or do I give my own wretched, sinful existence too much credit? Are my contributions of deadly desires and limitless complacency enough to give an ounce of power to the dammed deceiver? If so, are the rare moments of surrender to God in me really destroying the wicked systems of the world by bearing witness to the true reality of God’s Kingdom?

It is my deepest hope, or at least my best hope, that somehow, someday I will live and act and speak like Jesus. My own damn vanity and pride, my indifference for the situations of others and my longing for momentary acceptance and my fear of both success and failure all act as the brick and mortar that imprison me. But, it is the destructive grace of God on which I depend, to keep razing the fortress in which I have held myself captive. I know that he will, his Kingdom will, destroy hell’s gates and let all of those who dare escape run free. It is this trust, that if God’s power can level gates of pure evil, He can and will overwhelm my pride and all of my best and worst intentions.

Random Thoughts

In recent times I havent felt inclined to blog. I have however been writing a great deal, as any of you other graduate students will understand. I have also been in a much more contemplative mood lately, reading and resting more than preaching, teaching and blogging. Here are some thoughts that I have had recently. Most of them are about various social ethics topics since that is where I spend most of my intellectual time. I must confess however that I dont intend to substantiate any of them at this time, nor am I completely convinced that they are all true, they are simply things that have come to my mind and most of them are things that I would like to research more. Here ya go…

“Wonders why it is ok to kill in war to stop people from committing evil acts but it is considered a terrible thing to kill an abortion doctor to prevent him from killing innocent babies? Is this a double standard? Do we really believe the unborn are truly living?” I of course dont advocate either, I am just trying to understand pro-war and pro-life logic.

“If folks think that gay marriage should be outlawed because it is an immoral choice, then so should athiesm, based on that logic. Also, those who are insulted that the gay rights movement is being compared to the civil  rights movement because there “are ex-gays, and no ex-blacks” they should think about the american revolution that was about being ex-british, or the protestant reform as being ex-catholics. People simply want their freedom and their rights. In that regard these movements are all the same.”

“Any ethic that sees violence as an option is necessarily an ethic that rejects the teaching and example of Jesus. If we use violence we in essence decalre that what Jesus said and did to combat evil in the world can now be put aside for a more “effective” way of delaing with things here and now. This  ethic of accepting viloence seems so right because we can see tangible results quickly, but it is never faithful to the one who promises that vengance and protection are his alone.”

“We need to deal with abortion in a way that is redemptive to both mother and child. Law does not do this. It may save the life of the child, but will often push the mother away from the church and she may take her child with her. If we use the power of law instead of the better power of relationship to save the child, then we take the chance that we only save the child’s physical life while we lose the soul of both mother and child.”

“Omnipotence means God can do whatever He damn well pleases and that there is no power outside of God that can compel him to act or limit him. He is completely free, even free from the need to choose; He simply acts out of his intrinsic character. His Character is good, love, and holiness, and it is his perogative to act unconditionally upon each of these. Truly omnipotence is in the service of His love. Omnipotence is the power of Love!”

“I love communion because it is at the table that revelation happens, we invite Jesus in but he becomes the host.”

“Love not holiness is God’s primary attribute from which all the others flow.”

These are some words that describe where I am at in my Christian faith journey. “Post-liberal, Open Theist, Anabaptist, Restorationist, Anarchist, Pacifist, Existentialist, Inclusivist, Christus Victor & Substitution Theorist,  Trinitarian, Evangelical, Eccumenical, Emerging, Orthodox, Biblical, Charismatic, Missional, Green, Arminain, Amillineal.”

“I am more convinced than ever that we need to bless women to become preachers and teachers in the church… It is right and good for us to encourage our sisters in using their gifts to prophesy, preach, teach and lead.”

“If Calvin’s understanding of double predestination is true, then it seems that God is a racist.”

“God has no cause and is infinitely and simply one. He is therefore fully involved in all of his actions. Even so, God is infinite unlike anything else and likewise without any measurement, too big for all the heavens to contain, yet able to enter our realm even in flesh. He He in contrast to other gods, is alive, the ultimate reality of life itself and the One who is active among all creation.”

“The church should refuse to let anyone else feed our hungry or clothe our naked.”

“Community is messy business, but like a Jackson Pollock painting, there is beauty in the mess.”

Again I dont intend to try an substantiate any of these right now, but I am working on papers dealing with a few of these statements. If you have a comment or complaint feel free to express it. Now for me its back to the grind of papers and projects.

Nonviolence in the Face of Rape: Possible?

When folks find out that I am a pacifist it is virtually inevitable that they will ask me this hypothetical question: “What if someone broke into your house and tried to rape your wife, how could you not get violent then?” I admit that I have struggled with this question and others like it. The realization that difficult situations like this so often move beyond the realm of hypothetical into the realm of reality for so many people makes me regularly revisit my pacifist views with new suspicions. Nonetheless, I keep coming back to the person and teachings of Jesus and hearing his call to nonviolent, redeeming love. Here is one way that this very difficult scenario may play out, and this story is not merely notional, it is the real life experience of a woman who demonstrated the non-violent and redemptive love of Jesus while protecting her chastity.

Rather than destruction of enemies, the Christian ethic calls for their conversion and counts on enough love on my part to facilitate the process….

I was awakened late one night several years ago by a man kicking open the door to my bedroom. The house was empty. The phone was downstairs. He was somewhat verbally abusive as he walked over to my bed. I could not find his eyes in the darkness but could see the outline of his form. As I lay there, felling a fear and vulnerability I had never before experienced, several thoughts ran through my head – all in a matter of seconds. The first was the uselessness of screaming. The second was the fallacy of having a gun hidden under your pillow. Somehow I could not imagine this man standing patiently while I reached under my pillow for my gun. the third thought, I believe, saved my life. I realized with a certain clarity that either he and I made it through this situation safely – together- or we would both be damaged. Our safety was connected. If he raped me he would be hurt as well. If he went to prison, the damage would be greater. That thought disarmed me. It freed me from my own desire to lash out and at the same time from my paralysis. It did not free me from the feelings of fear but from fear’s control over my ability to respond. I found myself acting out of concern for both my own safety which caused me to react with a certain firmness but with surprisingly little hostility in my voice.

I asked him what time it was. He answered. That was a good sign. I commented that his watch and the clock on my night table had differnt times. His said 2:30, mine said 2:45. I had just set mine. I hope his watch wasn’t broken. When the atmosphere began to calm a little I asked him how he had gotten into the house. He’d broken through the glass in the back door. I told him that presented me with a problem as I did not have the money to buy new glass. He talked about some financial difficlties of his own. We talked until we were no longer strangers and I felt it was safe to ask him to leave. He didn’t want to; said he had no place to go. Knowing I did not have the physical power to force him out I told him firmly but respectfully, as equal to equal, I would give him a clean set of sheets but he would have to make his own bed downstairs. He went downstairs and I sat up in bed, wide awake and shaking for the rest of the night. The next morning we ate breakfast together and he left.

Several things happened that night. I allowed someone who I was afraid of to become human to me and as a result I reacted in a surprisingly human way to him. That caught him off guard. Apparently his scenario had not included a social sense of balance. By that time the vibes were all wrong for violence. Whatever had been motivating him was sidetracked and he changed his mind.

Through the effects of prayer, meditation, training and the experience of lesser kinds of assault, I had been able to allow what I call a context for conversion to emerge.*

This is just one story of many in which non-violent love set both the potential victim and assailant free and allowed them to find more of their humanity. I especially love the line “the vibes were all wrong for violence.” Isn’t this at least part of our call, to engender a world, where the kingship of Jesus can change the vibes making them all wrong for violence and all right for justice and peace? I believe it is, and I know that it may not always work and will often be costly and dangerous, but I also know that because of the resurrection of Christ it is both imperative and worthwhile.

*Originally from Angie O’Gorman, “Defense Through Disarmament: Nonviolence and Personal Assault,” The Universe Bends Toward Justice, ed. Angie O’Gorman, (Philadelphia, Pa.: New Society Publishers, 1990). Found in From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics, edited by Wayne G. Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey.

Weekly Roundup: Church of Christ Edition

I thought I would change up my roundup this week and focus specifically on issues in the churches of Christ, the fellowship with which I most readily associate myself. I dont often write about my own tribe’s particular issues, but I do truly love this family that led me to Christ and continues to help me grow. Therefore, I thought I would share with all of you, coC and otherwise, some of the interesting things I have come across recently regarding the churches of Christ. Every fellowship and denomination (yes I insinuated that the churches of Christ are indeed a denomination) has its issues. I have decided to post some resources I have found from around the web dealing with various issues in the churches of Christ. These particular resources generally, though not entirely, reflect my own views on these issues.

One of the issues that is pretty unique to the churches of Christ is the debate over instrumental verses a cappella music. Jay Guin has an astounding list of resources on this debate, including a lot of his own thoughts, book recommendations/reviews and some links to articles and sermons. These are a few of my particular favs: A review of Instrumental Music:Missing More Than Music by Danny Corbit, and these three posts of a fictional debate on the instruments subject. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.

On the issue of instruments, America’s largest church of Christ added an instrumental service a while back. Here are three sermons preached explaining Richland Hill’s position. I think they are well thought out and of course well delievered. Listen to Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.

Baptism has long been a particular area of interest in Restoration Movement churches. Honestly it is difficult to find many resources about this issue that arent terribly dogmatic. However John Mark Hicks, who is likely the best single resource on the subject in our fellowship, has written this superb book, Down to the River to Pray: Revisioning Baptism as God’s Transforming Work. He also has this short blog post about the traditional disagreement about baptism between the churches of Christ and Southern Baptists. I think the four points at the end of the post are particularly helpful for synthesizing Scripture’s presentation of baptism.

Another classic issue in the churches of Christ, although not completely unique to our fellowship, is the role of women in the church, in particular in public worship assemblies. Mike Cope has a brilliant sermon on the subject, explaining the Highland Church of Christ’s decision to have women play a more visible role in worship services. I also preached a sermon, one of the main reasons given for my being fired, about women’s roles, much of which is directly from Cope’s sermon.

One defining feature of my own tradition, of which I am particularly proud, is our history of peacemaking. Although, this aspect of the churches of Christ has been ignored or abandoned by many in our fellowship there is still a current of peacemakers running through our churches. This six part sermon series by Rick Atchley provides a good look at the Restoration tradtion of being peacemakers. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5 and Part 6. Also this article by Lee Camp gives convincing reasons why the church should be pacifist.

If you have any interest in Church of Christ/Restoration Movement issues, history, theology, ecclesiology and more then I recommend these resources. First, this is the most comprehensive list of primary and secondary resources from the Restoration Movement that I know of. It is from Memorial University and is both scholarly and accessible. Second, on a slightly less scholarly note here is a list of the best church of Christ blogs. There are a few which I was surprised to see on the list and several that were glaring in their absence, but it is a very good list nonetheless. Finally, this sermon series by ministers at the Fourth Avenue Church of Christ is a good place to start if you want to understand a healthy view of basic coC tenets.

I have two miscellaneous blog posts that didnt fit into the other sections but that I found interesting. Mike Cope has an interesting look at legalism, another unfortunate hallmark of the churches of Christ (though to be fair not at all unique to our fellowship). My new friend Jared Cramer presented a paper about homosexuality at Lipscomb University’s Christan Scholars Conference last year and predictably got a lot of grief for it. Here is his very gracious and well thought out response.

Enjoy. Let me know what you think, especially those of you from the Churches of Christ.

Christians, the Military and the Cult of the American Dream

I need to start this post by clarifying my intentions. My goal is not to disrespect any soldier or supporter of the American military. My purpose is to lay out some of the reasons why I myself do not and cannot support the military and to point to a few reasons why I disagree with some of the evaluations of my position. That is all. If you read any more than that into this post then there has been a complete failure of communication.

Several people have told me lately that they, or someone they love, fought in recent wars not because they believed in the cause but because they had a sense of duty to their country. Now as a Christian I am terribly suspicious of this sort of shallow deontological reasoning. Our greatest, more precisely, our only duty is to God. This duty necessarily precludes fighting in unjust wars (although, I would make the case that it goes even further, that Christians in fact should never use or promote violence.) However, I will let it suffice for now that Christians should not fight in any war not deemed “just” as determined by Augustine’s Just War Criteria. The distinct call of the biblical witness in fact compels us to openly and boldly defy “the call of duty” by the nation in which we find ourselves if it remotely conflicts with the call Christ has on our lives as non-violent peacemakers and aliens and strangers on this terrestrial globe. So if we want to make an appeal to a deontological ethic then I suggest that as Christians this can only mean that we seek out our duty to God, not to country, especially when the two are clearly in contradiction. With that said, I would make the argument that patriotism and the sense of patriotic duty that follows are frighteningly close to idolatry. The nation seeks to be the primary or even sole entity that is capable of our provision and protection and in return demands our allegiance. This sounds eerily familiar to the Shadrack, Meshack, and Abendigo story. We know better because it is God who is our sole provider and protector and the only one that can rightfully demand our allegiance.

In tandem with this, I have also been told by several folks that I cant make an intelligible judgment about the military since I myself have never been a part of the military. There are three problems with this accusation. First, I grew up in a military family. I am very familiar with how the military operates. I spent the greater part of my childhood shopping at the BX/PX and Commissary, being waved through the gates of various military bases and yes, recurrently being schooled in patriotism, duty to country and inherent honor that should be bestowed on any who have put on a military uniform. Not to mention, the almost absolute trust that we apparently supposed to put in our government and our military. I know what it is like to have friends and family away at war, what its like to deal with untimely deaths due to both enemy and friendly fire, and I even had a AWAC crash right down the street from my house. Several of my friends lost parents in that disaster. I think I have a little bit of perspective on the military. Some may object that I don’t know about the situation in the Middle East, to which I would concede that I don’t know as much as I would like to. However, I would say that I am more informed than most Americans, because my main research interests in recent years have related to the wars in which we now find ourselves. I would also like to add that currently that all my information about the middle east crisis is at best secondary, or tertiary, but that I intend to travel with a Christian peacemaking mission to either Iraq or Palestine next year. If after that trip my views radically change I would be happy to admit that. For now however my best judgment is that Christians should not be involved in fighting this or any other (unjust) war.

Second, this myopic assessment misses the greater point that I am not making a judgment on any military in particular, but on the Christian’s place in relation to any and all forms of militarism. It matters little to me if it is the military of America or China or Greece (I list these three countries because they are the ones in which I have lived) that is calling upon the Christian to fight, the Christian must reject this call if it in any way stands in contrast with the biblical witness. I am not specifically against the American military; I am against all militaries. It is my belief, as a Christian and as an aspiring theologian and philosopher/ethicist, that I am not only capable of declaring the truth of Jesus’ non-violent testimony and the harm of Jingoism (of any person in any nation), but obligated to do so. I am not making judgments on American soldiers, rather I am articulating what I believe to be the teaching of Jesus and the best logical choice for a Christian in anytime or place; that is the rejection of the myth of redemptive violence and a critically thought out ethic in relation to issues of war and peace.

Third, to say this necessarily implies that one is not qualified to make a judgment on any thing unless he or she has personally experienced it. This of course is fallacious. I am not yet a parent, but I can, and you would all likely agree, make the assessment that it is bad parenting to punch your child in the face. I don’t have to be a parent to make this call, nor do I have to be a soldier to declare that it is not acceptable, at the very least, for a Christian to fight for an unjust cause. Simply put, it is an erroneous claim that one cannot give any opinion on a topic until he or she has personally experienced it. That mentality goes against any convention of academia because often our best knowledge comes from the outside in not the other way around. While experience can certainly enlighten a position, it is not fundamental to the formation of an informed perspective. The witness of scripture and the early church, along with the best theologians and Christian ethicists throughout the centuries, would univocally point to a position that requires Christians to view their duty to God and his justice to universally trump any allegiance to a country or any other cause. 

Finally, and I wont deal with this in any depth at all (John Howard Yoder, Stanley Hauerwas and Greg Boyd among others have dealt with this rather extensively), some point to the violence in the Old Testament as reason enough for Christians to fight in the military today. There are at least three fundamental problems with this argument. First, simply put we are not living in the times of the Old Testament nor are we the nation of God’s chosen people. In the text of the OT we see that God used his chosen people, often against his seemingly original intention, to commit acts of violence. The reasons for this are hotly debated in the theological world, but either way it is certainly true that the people of God are no longer confined to a particular nation or ethnic group. Therefore it is only reasonable to assume that no nation is God’s instrument of justice and righteousness in the world today. Rather it is the witness of Christians living sacrificially that play this role not by using violence, but by following the non-violent example of Jesus.

Second, the Old Testament violence almost universally was about pointing to the power of God, not to Israel’s military might. While God certainly used violence in the OT it was most often his miraculous intervention, not the power of the world’s best military, that won the battles. It is also worth mentioning that the military conquests of the OT look nothing like the current wars. They were about establishing God’s people as the primary heralds of God’s sovereignty and supremacy over all the nations and their gods. This war, while some may intend it to be for the same reasons, cannot possibly accomplish this because America is not God’s chosen people and more importantly because Jesus has called us to conquer by the power of the cross not the power of the sword.

Third, and most importantly, we know Jesus to be the most complete and authoritative revelation of God’s Character, and the one to whom we have given our lives and agreed to follow. This means we don’t start defining Christian ethics by looking to the narratives of the Old Testament; we look to the person and teachings of Jesus who is the Logos. It is through this lens that we can then appropriately assess the OT and the other writings in Scripture. If you start somewhere else, then I believe, that your reasoning will be fundamentally flawed because you have tried to define the greater by the lesser, the creator by the actions of his creation. While the bible is the word of God, Jesus is the Word of God. That distinction must be made if we are going to be able to establish any acceptable biblical ethic. It is Jesus who shows us God, and through whom we interpret all the rest of God’s revelations.

Again, my intention here is not to condemn or disrespect anyone. It is simply to lay out the reasons why I take the position I do in regards to the relationship between the church and the military. Regardless of where you come down on the issues I must say that I love you. All of my brothers and sisters, from soldiers to housewives, preachers to pediatricians are special to me and I cherish the family of God in a way that cannot effectively be expressed in words. I hope this note is challenging, maybe even convicting, but never condemning or judging. May God be with us all as we wrestle through this gauntlet that is life.

Christians and Politics: Abstinence is the Best Policy

This is a short paper I wrote, for an ethics class, about responsible engagement of the political sphere by Christians. I of course take the position that Christians should not get themselves tangled up in the worldly political game, but I was required to give a brief positive assessment of competing views so I did that although I am not convinced that the “positives” of other views are truly strengths at all. It is a very basic, perhaps even elementary, assessment but I believe it to be a sufficient introduction to this position. 

The Distinct Polity of the Church is Political Enough: Why Christians Should Abstain from Civil Governmental Politics

by Justin Bronson

 

I am persuaded that the most faithful way for Christians to engage the political sphere is by being a distinct polity unto themselves operating on the principle of imitating Christ’s example of cross-bearing love. In my view this precludes the participation of Christians in government, but requires us to transform the political sphere by questioning the powers, and exposing any sin by openly provoking them to direct their evil towards us just as Christ did. This could perhaps be viewed as a sort of mediation between Niebuhr’s Christ against culture, and Christ the transformer of culture.[i] We participate in what I will call selective engagement, meaning not that we choose when we are going to engage, but how we are going to engage the political sphere; specifically that we reject governmental positions and create our own peculiar polity of Christ-like living.

In Scripture we can see both apodictic and casuistic[ii] teachings[iii], and examples, particularly in the person of Christ; as well as an overarching, at least in the NT, principle of humble, self-sacrificial service[iv] as opposed to “fighting” worldly political battles as the means to transforming the world. This informs a position of selective engagement. Themes such as Satan being the god of this age[v], Jesus’ example of rejection of earthly power[vi], the demonic influence in government[vii] and of Christians being foreigners in earthly kingdoms[viii] all point to an idea of selective engagement. Our primary grounds for this selective engagement is, as already mentioned, the life of Christ. Instead of taking the kingdoms Satan offered,[ix] entering Jerusalem as the conquering earthly king, calling legions of angels,[x] or getting caught up in the politics of his day; Jesus rejected Satan’s offer of power,[xi] entered Jerusalem on a lowly donkey, died alone on a cross[xii], and called all people to take up their crosses and follow him.[xiii] Perhaps the best representative verse of Christ in this light is Col 2:15, “And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.”[xiv]

Many early Christians, the Anabaptist movement, and multiple contemporary theologians/ethicists, have also called the church to be its own polity as a way of influencing the world and subverting the current political sphere. Tertullian will, for this essay, serve as an example of the early Christian call to selective engagement. According to Hollinger, Tertullian believed “Christians were to refrain from political life because it involved emperor worship.”[xv] Although the American context does not require emperor worship, it does demand allegiance. This is something we as Christians cannot give because our sole allegiance is to Christ. This is where I would fall in line with Niebuhr’s assessment of Christ against culture when he says this approach “uncompromisingly affirms the sole authority of Christ over the Christian and rejects cultures’ claims to loyalty.”[xvi]

The Anabaptists picked up on this thinking and refused to let the church be defined by geography, and believed that government was unnecessary for Christians because the church was the their polity.[xvii] The Schleitheim Confession unabashedly declares that Christians should not be involved in government, pointing to the example of Christ[xviii] and the need for separation from the evils of the world[xix]. However, it wasn’t that they, and others like them,[xx] just wanted to be against culture. This is evidenced in Yoder’s critique of Niebuhr’s assessment of Christ against culture. Yoder points to an amalgamation with “Christ transforming culture”[xxi], when he says it’s “about devotion to the way of Christ, which at points conflicts with culture and society.”[xxii]

Contemporary theologians[xxiii] have also delved into this idea, including Stanley Hauerwas who says “The church does not exist to provide an ethos for democracy or any other form of social organization but stands as a political alternative to every nation, witnessing to the kind of social life possible for those that have been formed by the story of Christ.”[xxiv] Martin Luther King Jr. did not completely reject the notion of Christians in government, but he witnessed to the conflict between government and Christian ideals and called for a negotiation that ultimately seeks justice.[xxv]

Christians have also taken opposing views, each with particular strengths. Many, like Calvin, believed the church should indeed be involved in government[xxvi] claiming that those who refused to do so were “frantic and barbarous men are furiously endeavoring to overturn the order established by God.”[xxvii] The focus on God’s sovereignty, even in the political realm, and Christians’ use of the established order to advance kingdom ideals are strengths of this position. Others, like Luther proposed, that it is acceptable, but not necessary for Christians to be involved in government. His distinction between the two kingdoms[xxviii] allowed for Christian participation while not mandating it. He also proposed that the government should not be governed by Christian ideals. This has a particular strength because it attempts to keep the church and the state from getting too muddled while allowing for freedom of Christians to pursue any vocation in which he or she can do good. These views, and similar ones, have the three primary strengths of a broad range of influence and the possibility of “immediate” effectiveness, as well as the necessary power to enact proposed changes. The belief is, if a Christian can rightly participate in government he or she can enact good over a large number of people and possibly in a relatively short amount of time and to a great extent make sure it happens.

All of these things considered, it is my belief that Christians should actively engage society and the political sphere by being a separate and distinct polity. We therefore should avoid direct involvement in government such as serving as a governing official. The witness of Christ, the New Testament, various historical and contemporary individuals and movements have persuaded me that although the church can certainly bring about good through government; ultimately our responsibility is to be faithful to Christ as Lord and we must therefore take up our crosses and not the sword of power. We must imitate Jesus and not Caesar if we are ever going to change the world.

 

---

[i] Hollinger, Dennis, Choosing the Good: Christian Ethics in a Complex World (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002) 191-197, 208-213

[ii] Pohl, Christine- Class Handout,  Forms of Ethical Guidance in Scripture

[iii] Luke 9:48, John 10:37

[iv] E.g. Matt. 5:3ff, 16:24, Acts 20:18-21, Eph 6:12, Phil 2:3

[v] E.g. 2 Cor 4:4

[vi] E.g. John 6:15, Luke 4:7f

[vii] E.g. Luke 4:6, Eph 6:12, Col 2:15

[viii] E.g. 1 Pet 2:11

[ix] Luke 4:5f

[x] Matt 26:43

[xi] Luke 4:8

[xii] E.g. Matt 27:46

[xiii] E.g. Mark 8:34

[xiv] RSV

[xv] Hollinger p192

[xvi] Hollinger p191

[xvii] Hollinger p194

[xviii] Boulton, Wayne G., Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey, eds., From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics p286

[xix] Boulton p284

[xx] See for example Leo Tolstoy, Dorothy Day, Jacques Ellul, Vernard Eller, David Lipscomb and Various Monastic movements

[xxi] Hollinger p208

[xxii] Hollinger p194

[xxiii] Notably Vernard Eller, John Howard Yoder, Greg Boyd, Lee Camp and Richard Hughes

[xxiv] Hollinger p55

[xxv] Boulton p429

[xxvi] Hollinger p209

[xxvii] Calvin, John. Of Civil Government Ch. 20 www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.vi.xxi.html

[xxviii] Pohl, Christine- Class notes Christ and Culture in Paradox from Martin Luther

Another Religion and Politics Internet Roundup

Again, I have failed to make time to blog lately. Hooray for intensive classes! I have come across several interesting articles and blog posts in the last few weeks. Sometime this week I intend to start posting a chapter by chapter review of Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion. For now, enjoy this internet roundup. 

The homosexual marriage debate is particularly fascinating to me and I have been reading a lot about it lately. Here are just a few of the different views I have found. These two posts from Religious Rhetorics provide a look at rhetorical fallacies in the gay marriage debate. Part 1, Part 2. 

In that vein, this is an interesting and provocative take on the “choice” to be gay.

Bart D. Ehrman has gotten a lot of attention lately because of his books challenging various Christians beliefs and church history. Here is a short response by N.T Wright to Ehrman’s book God’s Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question – Why We Suffer. Christian Conversations provides us with this Stephen Colbert interview/humiliation of Ehrman, in typical Colbert fashion, about Ehrman’s book Jesus Interrupted.

Many of you know that I go to a Wesleyan seminary, yet I am not generally a big fan of John Wesley. This sermon by Wesley therefore came as a pleasant surprise to me. Wesley has a great view of the potential destructive power of wealth. This sermon on slavery also impressed me, especially considering his socio-cultural context.

Abortion. Thats probably sufficient to get some folks riled up, but I thought this blog post at Nachfolge hopefully reminds us that our actions should be redemptive and restorative for both mother and child.

My wife and I lived and worked in China for a year teaching English and sharing our light and hope with others and we will always feel a special connection to China. So I mourn the violence directed at my Chinese friends on the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.

Finally, I leave you with what I hope will become a regular feature on my blog; the What The Sheol?!?! section. For my first WTS?!?! I give you this article about a pastor inviting people to bring their guns to church. Just what the world needs…