One of the things that drew me to the United Methodist Church was the way the church understands Jesus, and particularly the Social Principles that develop out of that understanding.
I grew up in a tradition that was well acquainted with what I would call the ‘Spiritual’ side if Jesus. Throughout the New Testament we see ample evidence that Jesus spent considerable time talking about what we might think of as spiritual matters- mainly those things that have to do with our personal relationships with God.
But the tradition I came from often seemed to be unaware that Jesus had more dimensions to his teaching and life. They presented what I would call a flat, or ‘one dimensional’ Jesus. But the Jesus we meet in scripture is much more complex than that. Yes, he certainly speaks to our personal spirituality, but like a cut diamond, he and his ministry have many sides.
In addition to the spiritual Jesus, there is the Jesus who teaches in the tradition of the wisdom teachers, men and women who focused on what we might call everyday wisdom. We see this in several of Jesus’ parables: The Wise and Foolish Builders (Matt 7- 24- 27; Luke 6:47- 49) comes to mind.
There is also the revolutionary Jesus often described best by those we call ‘liberation’ or ‘feminist’ theologians. In several places through the gospels we meet a Jesus with a bit if an edge to him. His gives advice that relates directly to resistance against the powers and power structures of this world, and particularly the Roman government. And of course, the Romans crucify him as a revolutionary and a traitor.
And then there is Jesus the Jewish Prophet, standing in the long line of Jewish prophets, rebuking the religious leaders and the people of Israel for the ways they are living out injustice. Here we meet a Jesus who teaches and performs prophetic acts that point to the way we are to care for the oppressed, the out casts, etc… Jesus the prophet stands against those who would oppress the poor, and champions a God who is unrelenting love toward all people. One thinks immediately of Luke 4.
All of these various streams come together into one God- man that we as Christians believe is both the Jewish Messiah and the Savior of the world. And it is in the struggle to understand this complex person of Jesus that we as a church develop principles to guide our lives together within our societies and our world. These principles are the Social Principles.
Because the life, teaching, and spirituality of Christ can be challenging, if not out- right difficult to grasp at times, our Social Principles do not always resonate with every United Methodist. We continue to struggle with what it means to have the mind of Christ, and sometimes that struggle is seen in our statements about how we should live in the world. The Social Principles represent a living and changing tradition in our United Methodist Church. They represent the best answers we have at any given time to the more difficult questions that face our social world.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Where do we Expect to Find Christ at Christmas?
In the first chapter of Luke we find two parallel stories: the story of the announcement of John’s birth and the story of the announcement of the birth of Christ. These two stories, so similar in structure and flow, create several compelling points of contrast. The very settings of the story provide material worthy of reflection.
Zechariah’s encounter with Gabriel takes place exactly where a first century Jew would have expected: In the Holy of Holies, the Temple. In first century Judaism, it was understood that God encounters people (sometimes through intermediary’s like angels) either in the Temple, or through the Torah. Both, in some sense, ‘housed’ the presence of God. At first thought, this may seem somewhat foreign, considering the emphasis we as Christians have often placed on the concept that God is accessible everywhere. And yet, do we not often think of coming into God’s presence in a special way at Church, or in the reading of scripture.
Mary’s encounter however takes place in a most unlikely location. Her encounter occurs in a quiet, poor home located in what was the peasant village Galilee. Galilee was the sort of place that might have caused a sigh in the mind of the elite… backward, poor, without proper religion. This would have been a lowly sort of place… the sort of place that would cause someone to ask, “Can anything good come from Nazareth?”
And yet, God’s messenger, and later Immanuel (‘God with us’), would break into our human existence within this very humble environment. In choosing to come to us, God seems to have chosen an unlikely spot… a peasant girl in a peasant village, with what would seem like little significance. God doesn’t present God's self as we would expect, but instead challenges us to think of God’s presence in new ways. God in Christ defies our expectations, and refuses to be limited by our ideas about divinity and presence. God goes where God will.
All of this begs the question, where do we expect to encounter Christ this Christmas? Will we find Christ in our beautiful church services, full of ritual and tradition? Surely the presence will be there. Will we find Christ in the familiar telling of the scriptural stories? Perhaps, if we are open to let them speak to us in fresh ways. But maybe we need to look for Christ in the unlikely places as well. Perhaps we will find Christ in the soup kitchens, or the homeless shelters. Maybe we will find Christ at a local community center, or the Salvation Army. Or maybe, just maybe, we will find Christ in the eyes of a helpless child, born into poverty, with the entire world stacked against her. What would it mean to find Christ there?
Most gracious and creative God… may we find you this season where you choose to dwell, and embrace the opportunities to seek your presence in those unexpected places.
Zechariah’s encounter with Gabriel takes place exactly where a first century Jew would have expected: In the Holy of Holies, the Temple. In first century Judaism, it was understood that God encounters people (sometimes through intermediary’s like angels) either in the Temple, or through the Torah. Both, in some sense, ‘housed’ the presence of God. At first thought, this may seem somewhat foreign, considering the emphasis we as Christians have often placed on the concept that God is accessible everywhere. And yet, do we not often think of coming into God’s presence in a special way at Church, or in the reading of scripture.
Mary’s encounter however takes place in a most unlikely location. Her encounter occurs in a quiet, poor home located in what was the peasant village Galilee. Galilee was the sort of place that might have caused a sigh in the mind of the elite… backward, poor, without proper religion. This would have been a lowly sort of place… the sort of place that would cause someone to ask, “Can anything good come from Nazareth?”
And yet, God’s messenger, and later Immanuel (‘God with us’), would break into our human existence within this very humble environment. In choosing to come to us, God seems to have chosen an unlikely spot… a peasant girl in a peasant village, with what would seem like little significance. God doesn’t present God's self as we would expect, but instead challenges us to think of God’s presence in new ways. God in Christ defies our expectations, and refuses to be limited by our ideas about divinity and presence. God goes where God will.
All of this begs the question, where do we expect to encounter Christ this Christmas? Will we find Christ in our beautiful church services, full of ritual and tradition? Surely the presence will be there. Will we find Christ in the familiar telling of the scriptural stories? Perhaps, if we are open to let them speak to us in fresh ways. But maybe we need to look for Christ in the unlikely places as well. Perhaps we will find Christ in the soup kitchens, or the homeless shelters. Maybe we will find Christ at a local community center, or the Salvation Army. Or maybe, just maybe, we will find Christ in the eyes of a helpless child, born into poverty, with the entire world stacked against her. What would it mean to find Christ there?
Most gracious and creative God… may we find you this season where you choose to dwell, and embrace the opportunities to seek your presence in those unexpected places.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
The Myth of Redemptive Violence
Tuesday evening, Oct 30th, with only minutes to spare, the U S Supreme Court issued a Stay of Execution for Mississippi prisoner Earl W Berry. The Stay was issued pending a determination the high court will make on a related case from Kentucky involving a challenge to the constitutionality of lethal injection as a means of execution.
Mr. Berry was convicted some twenty years ago for the kidnapping and brutal beating of Mary Bounds, leading to her death. Ms. Bounds, fifty- six at the time, was on her way home from choir practice.
It is impossible for me to imagine the pain and suffering of the Bounds family. Perhaps the best I can do is to recognize the depth and reality of their pain, and acknowledge the depravity involved in such a crime. I can imagine no sufficient defense for such an act. I am sure that Mr. Berry has numerous mental and emotional issues in his past, but at the end of the day, he made the decision that night, and now he must live with the consequences.
But should death by the state be the consequences? Clearly killing Mr. Berry will not bring back Mary Bounds, nor will it prevent other similar and terrible crimes. Life imprisonment would protect the public from Mr. Berry, and while many still claim that the death penalty is a deterrent, studies show that simply is not the case. No, the death penalty will not make us safer… and yet we still hold on to what Walter Wink and many others have called the myth of redemptive violence.
This pervasive myth is taught to us from an extremely young age, through our cartoons, stories, and even sometimes through our misguided theology. The basic message is this: violence has the ability to bring salvation. When our favorite super hero finally wins the day by destroying the enemy, our culture breaths a collective Yes! It runs so deep that we don’t even see it. I recently watched a movie in a packed theatre, and at the point that the ‘hero’ (an FBI agent) was finally able to defeat the ‘villain,’ (a terrorist) in a terribly violent and graphic way, the crowd of movie goers cheered. As I thought about this response, someone behind me, in a sincere moment of mindfulness, whispered under his breath, “I can’t believe we just cheered that.” It literally made my skin crawl. The myth can bring us to cheer the brutal taking of a life, without any reflection upon the fact that God created that life. The myth tells us that our enemy is another person, and blinds us to the fact that our real enemy is the evil that distorts our humanity and the humanity of the other.
In reality, history and experience has shown us that violence never brings salvation. It might produce very temporary safety, but in the end violence only perpetuates violence. Is it possible for us to completely free ourselves from violence, from war making and the taking of lives? I don’t know. We live in a fallen world, and perhaps it is true that, on occasion, we have to do terrible things to provide for immediate safety of someone or something. But there is really no reason for the state to perpetuate this myth of redemptive violence through the killing of prisoners that can be separated from society. The only reason I know of to kill Mr. Berry is for retribution, and that is just a fancy way of saying vengeance. But according to scripture, vengeance should be left to God. As humans we simply are not equipped to make those decisions, and in truth cannot fully understand the consequences.
I hope we all continue to keep the Bounds family in our prayers, as well as the family of Earl Berry. The tragedy in these lives is too much to comprehend. But let us also continue to search for the right answer to matters of capital punishment… the Godly answer… and not continue on mindlessly believing the myth of redemptive violence.
Mr. Berry was convicted some twenty years ago for the kidnapping and brutal beating of Mary Bounds, leading to her death. Ms. Bounds, fifty- six at the time, was on her way home from choir practice.
It is impossible for me to imagine the pain and suffering of the Bounds family. Perhaps the best I can do is to recognize the depth and reality of their pain, and acknowledge the depravity involved in such a crime. I can imagine no sufficient defense for such an act. I am sure that Mr. Berry has numerous mental and emotional issues in his past, but at the end of the day, he made the decision that night, and now he must live with the consequences.
But should death by the state be the consequences? Clearly killing Mr. Berry will not bring back Mary Bounds, nor will it prevent other similar and terrible crimes. Life imprisonment would protect the public from Mr. Berry, and while many still claim that the death penalty is a deterrent, studies show that simply is not the case. No, the death penalty will not make us safer… and yet we still hold on to what Walter Wink and many others have called the myth of redemptive violence.
This pervasive myth is taught to us from an extremely young age, through our cartoons, stories, and even sometimes through our misguided theology. The basic message is this: violence has the ability to bring salvation. When our favorite super hero finally wins the day by destroying the enemy, our culture breaths a collective Yes! It runs so deep that we don’t even see it. I recently watched a movie in a packed theatre, and at the point that the ‘hero’ (an FBI agent) was finally able to defeat the ‘villain,’ (a terrorist) in a terribly violent and graphic way, the crowd of movie goers cheered. As I thought about this response, someone behind me, in a sincere moment of mindfulness, whispered under his breath, “I can’t believe we just cheered that.” It literally made my skin crawl. The myth can bring us to cheer the brutal taking of a life, without any reflection upon the fact that God created that life. The myth tells us that our enemy is another person, and blinds us to the fact that our real enemy is the evil that distorts our humanity and the humanity of the other.
In reality, history and experience has shown us that violence never brings salvation. It might produce very temporary safety, but in the end violence only perpetuates violence. Is it possible for us to completely free ourselves from violence, from war making and the taking of lives? I don’t know. We live in a fallen world, and perhaps it is true that, on occasion, we have to do terrible things to provide for immediate safety of someone or something. But there is really no reason for the state to perpetuate this myth of redemptive violence through the killing of prisoners that can be separated from society. The only reason I know of to kill Mr. Berry is for retribution, and that is just a fancy way of saying vengeance. But according to scripture, vengeance should be left to God. As humans we simply are not equipped to make those decisions, and in truth cannot fully understand the consequences.
I hope we all continue to keep the Bounds family in our prayers, as well as the family of Earl Berry. The tragedy in these lives is too much to comprehend. But let us also continue to search for the right answer to matters of capital punishment… the Godly answer… and not continue on mindlessly believing the myth of redemptive violence.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)