I recently sat in on a presentation about the N. African Patristic Theologian Tertullian by a friend named Tom Longenecker. Perhaps like me you are a bit unfamiliar with Tertullian. Well, his bio includes such distinctions as 1) being one of the first theologians to develop the concept of Trinity, 2) being deem by some to be a heretic because of his connection with the Donatists, and 3) is often cited as a church father who advocated pacifism and non-participation in the military in the early church (which is somewhat debatable).
Tom's presentation focused on #3. I don't have the time, energy, or ability to unpack Tom's research on Tertullian, but here's the jist of what he said - Tertullian is not necessarily pacifist as we would understand it today, and it's not even clear if Tertullian believed participation in war was immoral for a Christian. What is clear is that he was very concerned with the notion that Christians cannot serve two masters. In his context of Pax Romana, Tertullian saw how the Roman Empire was in competition with God because it demanded allegiance, devotion and subservience. Christians, he asserted, cannot serve two masters and the empire was (is) in competition with God. Thus, to support and participate in the empire is to commit idolatry.
So while it's hard to say if Tertullian was a "pacifist," it is safe to say that he is anti-empire. Christianity, for Tertullian, is a counter-cultural movement and it is our loyalty to Christ as Lord that determines if/how we participate with the nation-state.
I like this concept. It recognizes pacifism as an ideology like any other that can be co-opted, manipulated, and elevated as a false god just like militarism, socialism, the free market, etc. Being anti-empire is less of an ideology and more of a posture. It is broader than pacifism which is primarily concerned with the immorality of war. Being anti-empire involves all the ways in which the nation-state demands our loyalty and worship over-against god. It has implications for economics, class, race relations, gender, and more.
Essentially, violence and war is the way the empire protects and maintains the political, social, and religious status-quo. Tertullian is calling us to go deeper than just rejecting the protection of empire (all the while perhaps enjoying the benefits of being citizens of the empire). He's calling us to reject the very foundations and expectations of empire. He's calling us to be non-conformed. Why? Because we worship the living God, creator of the universe, prince of peace, the everlasting father. And he calls as to another way of living and another way of perceiving reality.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Death of a Broadcaster
It's a sad day in Steeler Nation. Myron Cope, a beloved Pittsburgh Sports Broadcaster has died. More than any other person, Myron embodied the heart, soul, and ethos of the Pittsburgh Steelers. He invented the Terrible Towel, was a trend setter, a composer, and received many honors for his skills as a sports writer and broadcaster. Go here to read his full obituary.
Myron was definitely unique and eccentric. The outsider may call him a bumbling fool, but to Steeler Nation he is a poet. Others may find him unorthodox, but in Pittsburgh he was our Pope. To get a little better idea of what I'm talking about, visit my favorite page of Myron Cope sound bites and then visit pittsburgese.com if you need any help with translation.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Bearing with the Weak: A Virtual Metaphor
It's almost been a month since my last posting. This does not come as a surprise to me (see my very first post on this blog). Yet again it seems as if I've created and am now neglecting another blog. I hadn't even thought about this, but then I got a gmail chat from friend Ben. It went something like this....
As a result, blogging is on my mind again, and I'm aware that I need to write something, anything, just to keep this blog going. Not because it's a profound blog, but because it's not a good practice to leave things unfinished and abandoned.
It was a simple gesture by Ben, but it got me thinking of how bloging delinquency can serve as a metaphor for our faith journeys. It's easy to grow lax and complicit - It's easy to get distracted and lose sight of what we set out to do. Sometimes we need our brother or sister to give us a gentle nudge or a swift kick in the pants. And sometimes we need the strong (i.e. Ben and his bloging briliance) to bear with the weak (we all know who that is).
11:30 AM Ben: you need some new blog material
don't let this one die!
11:33 AM me: haha - yeah, my bad
I've been busy
this is what always happens
As a result, blogging is on my mind again, and I'm aware that I need to write something, anything, just to keep this blog going. Not because it's a profound blog, but because it's not a good practice to leave things unfinished and abandoned.
It was a simple gesture by Ben, but it got me thinking of how bloging delinquency can serve as a metaphor for our faith journeys. It's easy to grow lax and complicit - It's easy to get distracted and lose sight of what we set out to do. Sometimes we need our brother or sister to give us a gentle nudge or a swift kick in the pants. And sometimes we need the strong (i.e. Ben and his bloging briliance) to bear with the weak (we all know who that is).
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Double Feature
Over the past several months my morning routine of ESPN and Daily Show has been cut in half due to the writers strike. But by accident I clicked on my Daily Show link only to see that there was new, current material up on the web. I was estatic. What made me even happier was that the latest clips included an interview of Jim Wallis of Sojourners. Double Bonuses abound! John Stewart and Jim Wallis; New Daily Show Clips and a New Book Release; Comedy Central and Sojourners; Social Justice and Spirituality; I need to stop myself before I get too excited.
Anyway... heres the clip with some good food for thought by two men who have profoundly shaped my world view.
Anyway... heres the clip with some good food for thought by two men who have profoundly shaped my world view.
Monday, January 7, 2008
A Culture of Remembering
I'm back from Christmas and New Years break. Emiley and I had the opportunity to be with her family in Southern Indiana over Christmas. It was a good time to reconnect, share laughs, good food, and memories (hence the topic of this post).
I've been attending Christmas with Emiley's family for 6 years now, and every year there is the same ritual. Christmas eve is held at her Grandparents, and before gifts are opened, the Christmas story is read and every one goes around to share thanksgiving, a significant event from the last year, or whatever comes to mind. On Christmas morning with just Emiley's immediate family, we essentially do the same thing.
In years past I always felt awkward during this; like I was in a discussion that I really should not be a part of. The family would share such deep stories of meaningful memories and gratitude for their life together with such intimacy that I felt like a voyager. In the past, when it was my turn, I said some general mumblings just to more on to the next person.
But this year I didn't. This year I offered the family reflections on how I've come to appreciate their tradition. I said that they are a family that remembers well - not just during Christmas, but in fact all the time in almost every conversation someone will launch off on an epic story which makes the ordinary moments of life seem spectacular. I shared how one of the main mandates of the Old Testament is to remember to Lord your God who brought you out of slavery in Egypt. This call echoes throughout Moses' teachings in the Pentateuch. Later, the prophets challenge the people to remember when they turn their backs on God and neighbor. And in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, initiated during the Passover, we are called to remember the many ways God has reached out to reconcile the people of God - ultimately expressed in the incarnation or God made Flesh.
There are a lot of books these days written about how the church in a post-modern, post-Christendom context needs to embrace the practice of sharing stories in how we do mission because people today relate more to personal story (testimony?) than they do grand meta-narratives about how the world works or who God is. It's a good concept and a vital practice for the church to embrace. But sometimes I have to sit back and laugh about how story is all the rage these days and is supposedly cutting edge in how we create and sustain communities. I laugh because here's a traditional family in rural Indiana, farmers, people of the land, not highly educated, and suspicious of change who doesn't need the next new pastor/rock star, book, conference, or seminary education to tell them that sharing our stories is integral part of our faith. They don't even do it (consciously) because of the biblical mandate. They do it because they understand family and community to be a vital part of one's formation.
To busy, fast-paced, technology-embracing urbanites like myself we may look at them as out of touch, resistant to change and creativity, and stuck in their ways. And to be sure their big family in a small town needs to be challenged by mission so that they do not become insular and their stories not exclusive. But it's also a family that by its non-conformity to the world around them never lost or forgot the simple truth that stories mean something, and remembering one's story of faith, family, and context is a precious pearl which is too often lost in our transient, globalized world.
By remembering so well in such a natural way, they remind me to not just talk about stories, but live into them, embrace them, share them, and never forget them.
I've been attending Christmas with Emiley's family for 6 years now, and every year there is the same ritual. Christmas eve is held at her Grandparents, and before gifts are opened, the Christmas story is read and every one goes around to share thanksgiving, a significant event from the last year, or whatever comes to mind. On Christmas morning with just Emiley's immediate family, we essentially do the same thing.
In years past I always felt awkward during this; like I was in a discussion that I really should not be a part of. The family would share such deep stories of meaningful memories and gratitude for their life together with such intimacy that I felt like a voyager. In the past, when it was my turn, I said some general mumblings just to more on to the next person.
But this year I didn't. This year I offered the family reflections on how I've come to appreciate their tradition. I said that they are a family that remembers well - not just during Christmas, but in fact all the time in almost every conversation someone will launch off on an epic story which makes the ordinary moments of life seem spectacular. I shared how one of the main mandates of the Old Testament is to remember to Lord your God who brought you out of slavery in Egypt. This call echoes throughout Moses' teachings in the Pentateuch. Later, the prophets challenge the people to remember when they turn their backs on God and neighbor. And in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, initiated during the Passover, we are called to remember the many ways God has reached out to reconcile the people of God - ultimately expressed in the incarnation or God made Flesh.
There are a lot of books these days written about how the church in a post-modern, post-Christendom context needs to embrace the practice of sharing stories in how we do mission because people today relate more to personal story (testimony?) than they do grand meta-narratives about how the world works or who God is. It's a good concept and a vital practice for the church to embrace. But sometimes I have to sit back and laugh about how story is all the rage these days and is supposedly cutting edge in how we create and sustain communities. I laugh because here's a traditional family in rural Indiana, farmers, people of the land, not highly educated, and suspicious of change who doesn't need the next new pastor/rock star, book, conference, or seminary education to tell them that sharing our stories is integral part of our faith. They don't even do it (consciously) because of the biblical mandate. They do it because they understand family and community to be a vital part of one's formation.
To busy, fast-paced, technology-embracing urbanites like myself we may look at them as out of touch, resistant to change and creativity, and stuck in their ways. And to be sure their big family in a small town needs to be challenged by mission so that they do not become insular and their stories not exclusive. But it's also a family that by its non-conformity to the world around them never lost or forgot the simple truth that stories mean something, and remembering one's story of faith, family, and context is a precious pearl which is too often lost in our transient, globalized world.
By remembering so well in such a natural way, they remind me to not just talk about stories, but live into them, embrace them, share them, and never forget them.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Was Wesley an Anabaptist?
In a recent news letter from the UK Anabaptist Network, they included the following quote from John Wesley:
‘Persecution never did, never could give any
lasting wound to genuine Christianity. But the
greatest it ever received, the grand blow which
was struck at the very root of that humble,
gentle, patient love which is the fulfilling of the
Christian law, the whole essence of true
religion, was struck in the fourth century by
Constantine the Great, when he called himself a
Christian, and poured in a flood of riches,
honours and powers upon the Christians, more
especially upon the clergy.’
lasting wound to genuine Christianity. But the
greatest it ever received, the grand blow which
was struck at the very root of that humble,
gentle, patient love which is the fulfilling of the
Christian law, the whole essence of true
religion, was struck in the fourth century by
Constantine the Great, when he called himself a
Christian, and poured in a flood of riches,
honours and powers upon the Christians, more
especially upon the clergy.’
I've read a bit, though not much, of Wesley in the past in one of my Church history classes. But in what I did read I did found some affinity between Wesley's holiness movement and the Anabaptist movement. From what I understand, Wesley's concept of Christian Perfection was that once a person is saved through faith, works of piety and devotion help a Christian overcome the sin and temptation that still remain within the flesh. Thus, Christians can in this lifetime give themselves completely over to God and attain 'perfection.' It is important to note however, that Wesley talked about this perfection as a goal, and not necessarily a plateau. His point being, a Christian must constantly guard against backsliding.
Similarly, Anabaptists talk about living in light of the reign of God and God's kingdom as something that is attainable in this life as well. Hence the emphasis on the beatitudes, peacemaking, justice, and Christian community. The Kingdom is not a far off, future reality or ideal. It is real and present and dictates how Christian disciples are to live and behave in this lifetime - the implications of asserting that Jesus is Lord.
So while Wesley and Anabaptist were perhaps dealing with different subjects, they were in many ways saying the same things with respect to Holiness/Christian Perfection and the Kingdom of God. The traditional dichotomy that I had always assumed was that Wesley was talking about personal piety whereas Anabaptist brought in the political/social/ethical dimension.
As with any dichotomy, I tried to hold both together in my faith journey. And being much more versed in Anabaptist theology, I understood the personal beliefs, faith, and devotion behind all the social implications of Kingdom of God. However, never before had I seen the social and cultural implications of Wesley's emphasis on holiness. The quote above helps me see that Wesley thought very much about the social/political/cultural, and had similar critiques of Christendom as Anabaptists do. As we move into (and are already in) a post-Christendom era in the West, many appreciate the teachings of the Anabaptist tradition. However, let's not neglect the voices of Wesley and others (I would add early Pentecostalism) who also challenged Christendom in their own ways.
Similarly, Anabaptists talk about living in light of the reign of God and God's kingdom as something that is attainable in this life as well. Hence the emphasis on the beatitudes, peacemaking, justice, and Christian community. The Kingdom is not a far off, future reality or ideal. It is real and present and dictates how Christian disciples are to live and behave in this lifetime - the implications of asserting that Jesus is Lord.
So while Wesley and Anabaptist were perhaps dealing with different subjects, they were in many ways saying the same things with respect to Holiness/Christian Perfection and the Kingdom of God. The traditional dichotomy that I had always assumed was that Wesley was talking about personal piety whereas Anabaptist brought in the political/social/ethical dimension.
As with any dichotomy, I tried to hold both together in my faith journey. And being much more versed in Anabaptist theology, I understood the personal beliefs, faith, and devotion behind all the social implications of Kingdom of God. However, never before had I seen the social and cultural implications of Wesley's emphasis on holiness. The quote above helps me see that Wesley thought very much about the social/political/cultural, and had similar critiques of Christendom as Anabaptists do. As we move into (and are already in) a post-Christendom era in the West, many appreciate the teachings of the Anabaptist tradition. However, let's not neglect the voices of Wesley and others (I would add early Pentecostalism) who also challenged Christendom in their own ways.
Monday, December 10, 2007
End of the Quarter Freedom
I just finished the Fall 07 Quarter of studies at Fuller. I always love the feeling of relief and accomplishment at the end of each term. It's great to just crash and have no worries until classes begin after New Years. But there's another part that I love even more - the part where I get to read and do whatever I want. So after a few days of doing nothing, I've had a very productive day of reading and reflecting.
I started this morning by finishing the long half-finished book I've been reading on the side: "The Irresistible Revolution: Living as an Ordinary Radical" by Shane Claiborne. It's a straight-forward, powerful read, and through his inspirational stories Shane makes the possibilities of living faithfully in obedience to God's Kingdom seem real and profoundly possible. It's just what my cynical mind needs sometimes - especially since this particular period of my life is devoted almost solely to the rigors of academia (for better or worse).
Then this afternoon I spent a prolonged period doing my Christmas devotionals. I decided to read through the birth narratives of Jesus in the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Though the stories are familiar, I was able to see them with some fresh perspective having just read Shane's book. I found myself focusing on the "ordinary" parts of the narratives. Those parts that give the narrative its teeth. The parts that I tend to skip over too quickly. The parts that if skipped over too quickly turn the coming of Christ into some cosmic fairy tale rather than the real, historical in-breaking of God's Kingdom on earth. So for what it's worth, here are a few of the things that jumped out to me:
I started this morning by finishing the long half-finished book I've been reading on the side: "The Irresistible Revolution: Living as an Ordinary Radical" by Shane Claiborne. It's a straight-forward, powerful read, and through his inspirational stories Shane makes the possibilities of living faithfully in obedience to God's Kingdom seem real and profoundly possible. It's just what my cynical mind needs sometimes - especially since this particular period of my life is devoted almost solely to the rigors of academia (for better or worse).
Then this afternoon I spent a prolonged period doing my Christmas devotionals. I decided to read through the birth narratives of Jesus in the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Though the stories are familiar, I was able to see them with some fresh perspective having just read Shane's book. I found myself focusing on the "ordinary" parts of the narratives. Those parts that give the narrative its teeth. The parts that I tend to skip over too quickly. The parts that if skipped over too quickly turn the coming of Christ into some cosmic fairy tale rather than the real, historical in-breaking of God's Kingdom on earth. So for what it's worth, here are a few of the things that jumped out to me:
- I imagine Zechariah and Elizabeth (the parents of John the Baptist who came to prepare the way for Jesus) to be like the sweet old couple at your church who are always willing to help and to serve, yet often get overlooked or go unnoticed. (Luke 1:5-25)
- I imagine Mary would have at once been both freaked out and felt incredibly loved (by both God and Elizabeth) when Elizabeth speaks great things of Mary's (scandalous?) pregnancy before Mary even had the chance to tell Elizabeth what happened. (Luke 1:39-46)
- When Mary responds to Elizabeth she glorifies God and in Luke 1:53 she says "(the Lord) has filled the hungry with good things and the rich he has sent away empty." Shane's book is packed with stories of homeless men and women, children living in ghettos, people dying of disease, and people who have endured severe amounts of trauma yet live powerfully in light of the Kingdom of God in community with brothers and sisters who support them. Then I think of the high rates of loneliness, isolation, depression, and despair in what are called the "richest" nations in the world. I don't think that's just a coincidence.
- The main characters in this narrative had to withstand huge amounts of peer pressure in their roles. (Matt 1:18:20, Luke 1:57-63). Of course it sounds noble to say that I would have acted the same way. But when I'm honest I have to admit the many times I've failed in much more trivial situations.
- The "wise men from the east" that visit Jesus (Matt 2:2ff) were #1) not Jewish, #2) not Christian, and #3) likely from a little country we know today as Iraq.
- After the shepherds saw the baby Jesus, they told everybody they saw. The streets of Bethlehem were probably packed since large amounts of people descended upon the small town due to the census which Augustus had ordered (hence, there was no room for Mary and Joseph in the inn). And the shepherds, who were on the bottom of the economic totem pole of the day (think migrant laborers and factory workers), likely smelled from being in the fields with their animals. Luke 2:18 says "all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them. But Mary... pondered them in her heart." The contrast between the general public's reaction and Mary's reaction makes me think the word "wondered" is simply a polite way of saying the people smiled nervously, nodded, clutched their purses and wallets a little tighter, and tried not to get sucked into unwanted conversations. And I think of all the times I've done that on the metro, the bus, or walking downtown.
- Among those who frequented the temple where Jesus was circumcised, I bet Simeon and Anna had a reputation for being a little crazy, and that parents told their kids to avoid them. (Luke 2:21-38)
- When Mary and Joseph were returning home after registering in Bethlehem, they were warned to go down into Egypt because Herod was looking to kill baby Jesus. (Matt 2:13-21) To me, this connotes images of the underground railroad, harboring Jews during WWII, the new sanctuary movement, and many similar movements where provision was offered to those being persecuted and oppressed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)