In a speaking engagement I raised two fairly recent public statements as a case study in contrasts. One was the statement issued by Liverpool pastors speaking out against homophobia in their community in the wake of the beating death of a gay teen and near-fatal assault on another gay man. The other was the Manhattan Declaration - a call to defend the truths of sanctity of life, marriage and religious liberty. The contrast, as I saw it, was the difference in use of power.
It seemed to me that the Liverpool statement used the power of the signers to promote shalom for those in their community – including those who held divergent views. It was a statement that could create some problems for them, where the pastors could potentially lose power in their constituency.
The Manhattan Declaration, on the other hand, seemed to be using power to beget power. It seemed to me an example of a desperate church trying to reestablish the realm of Christendom in an increasingly post-Christendom context. (My personal view is that I don’t think the Kingdom really comes through the establishment of Christian Empire) Regardless of one’s convictions about the positions presented in the Declaration concerning abortion, homosexuality and religious freedom, I think every follower of Jesus needs to consider how God exerts his power.
Consider this Advent reading from Henri Nouwen:
God 'Unmasks the Illusion of Power'
Learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart. Matthew 11:29
God chose powerlessness. God chose to enter into human history in complete weakness. That divine choice forms the center of Christian faith. In Jesus of Nazareth, the powerless God appeared among us to unmask the illusion of power, to disarm the prince of darkness who rules the world, and to bring the divided human race to a new unity.
Through total and unmitigated powerlessness, God shows us divine mercy. The radical, divine choice is the choice to reveal glory, beauty, truth, peace, joy, and most of all, love in and through the complete divestment of power. It is very hard - if not impossible - for us to grasp this divine mystery.
Jesus, in all we do and say this Advent, may we follow your example of gentleness and humility.
Well as you might imagine, I got some flack for raising this case study in contrasts. It was interesting to me that my support of the Liverpool statement was considered to be an “endorsement of gay people” (which was viewed as negative). And that my critique of the Manhattan Declaration was perceived as divisive, dishonouring, tearing down the Body of Christ, and assisting in the promotion of the ‘gay agenda’ (whatever that even is exactly….)
Now I happen to really value unity in diversity. So, in raising my critiques my goal was not for everyone to agree with me or necessarily adopt my views. Rather, my goal was to get people thinking.
I fear we are too apathetic to really think. And even more, that we are too afraid to think.
I first spoke up for justice for glbtqi people in Uganda last March. At the time I could never have imagined the draconian legislation advocating extremely harsh penalties for gay people currently before that nation’s government. As I consider the jaw-dropping developments in the Ugandan context over the last 9 months, I see a lot of scrambling (I won’t speak up …. Oh, now there’s a lot of pressure …. OK I will speak up …..). If you are unfamiliar with all the developments, check out this link for a comprehensive time line and description of events. And if you’ve been silent up till now: go think, pray and act. A first, easy step is to join the facebook group “Speaking Out Against Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009”
Friends, these are real people with real lives that are at stake. What risks are you willing to take on their behalf? After my radio interview this week, a man emailed to say that he’s just had to resign from the position of elder in his church because he spoke out and advocated loving engagement with gay people. Would you risk your position in your church to stand up for justice and shalom?
I suppose one good thing about not really having much power is that you don’t fear losing it. Janis Joplin sang, “Another word for freedom is having nothing to lose.”
When it comes to engagement, not on gay issues, but engagement with people for whom gay issues are real, personal and intimate – I want to be truly free.
I want to be free to think - and to rethink.
Free to stand up and speak up.
Free to follow Jesus’ example: which essentially means free to lose everything, suffer much, have people misunderstand, misinterpret, desert and betray you (apparently, especially folks in your own religion) ….
Am I willing to experience all of that to speak up for justice and shalom?
Am I willing to experience all of that to challenge power politics and the church behaving like the empire?
Damn right I am.
Because the good news of the gospel begins with justice and shalom and it comes in the way of a subversive Kingdom not a power-majority empire.
It comes in the way of love.
(Personal note: For those who may be wondering, I was grateful for my sabbatical from July - September. I did begin my book - but, no, it is not finished. The last couple months being back have been jammed packed with speaking engagements. But, I am really looking forward to getting back into the swing of blogging - and hope to reconnect with y'all in the comment section. wendy)
Friday, December 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
I always appreciate your thoughtful approach to every subject...particlarly this one.
Some these days have been suggesting that all truth claims regardless of where they come from are claims to power...which may or may not be true :-)
While I understand the church's emulation of empire (having been synonymous with it for more than 1,500 years) it really cannot continue.
Hateful responses and attacks stem from fear...I pray that comfort, encouragement and blessing come to those who fear.
Be blessed Wendy, as you bring blessing.
Thanks Pete.
It seems to me that God, who chooses to reveal himself through powerlessness, most often reveals truth through relationship. So, a good litmus test for me is if I'm trying to allow truth to emerge in the context of my having invested in a relationship of mutuality, trust and respect OR am I trying to promote truth divorced from relationship. Inevitably, there are times to speak out publicly beyond the scope of personal relationship - but is it for the benefit of others or ourselves?
Nice to see that you are blogging here again. I started following this blog during the "Bridging the Gap" advertisements that got my attention and was since "introduced" to you by GCN radio. I highly respect what you're doing (at least as much as I can judge just from the bits I found about your work on the internet). I always admire people who are willing to live with the tension of having relationships with people who they disagree with.
So even if I may disagree with you as well on a lot of points, I'm really looking forward to reading more of your thoughts!
Tobias
Very interesting thoughts, Wendy. As I read through this, though, it seems to me that a more precise and telling word might be more applicable than "power." And that word would be "control." I say this because it seems to me that this is what the quest for power in this case -- and many cases -- is about. It's about the power to control.
The power to control what is moral and right. The power to control what others can or can't do. The power to control how others are viewed based on their choices.
We as humans like to be in control. (And if we can't be directly in control, we at least want to be in lock-step with whoever is in control -- or more accurately, we want them to be in lock-step with us.
In many ways, we seem to become frightened, defensive, and even aggressive when we're not in control. And I think it's important to wonder why that is and explore the possible answers. I think it would be extremely enlightening.
Hi Tobias - thanks for stopping by. Funny thing is, I am much more comfortable offering grace when I encounter someone who is positing ideas I disagree with than I am being in the position of needing grace when people disagree with me. I guess in my heart of hearts, I'm an idealist that wants everyone to get along and agree - even though I know it is totally unrealistic :) Hopefully, you'll share some of your thoughts too along the way here in the comments where the real conversations happen.
Jarred - I agree with that distinction. I often say that one of the most important things we need to remember (those of us who identify with the Christian faith particularly) is that we aren't anyone else's Messiah. As a follower of Christ, it is actually a great relief to me to know that I don't have to be G-d - because I would so screw it up. I really can entrust people to the One who really is God - and I can be free to simply love and serve people. In the Christian faith, I think a lot of control comes in when we fail to let God be God, Jesus be the Messiah, and the Holy Spirit the One who convicts and challenges us to be transformed more into the character and likeness of Christ. And it would seem to often be that such lack of trust comes down to a weird combination of pride and fear - a pretty common human fallback.
It was great to wake up to your post in my inbox this morning, Wendy. You are so right when you speak about the difference between the Kingdom of God and the kingdom of Christiandom. Real power and authority come from the One who gave up everything to save people who hated and disagreed with Him.
He gives us His power, not to control others, but to love and accept them. That's Christ's hallmark, really - He loves us home, He doesn't force or condemn or stone us home.
It's interesting that power/control/authority are not mentioned as fruits of the Spirit - except self-control.
God Bless you & have a wonderful Christmas,
Sandy
So true Sandy - I often think about what the fruits of the Spirit describe (and what they don't describe). Generosity isn't a specific fruit of the Spirit - but one of my personal core values (and something I still need to work on) - and I'm always grateful when I see evidence of it in these comment conversations.
Sandy - hope you're well - and also wishing you a wonderful Christmas.
Wendy, I'm so glad you're back! Your post made my day. I have been following the events in Uganda very closely. I read the Manhattan Declaration a few weeks ago, and it made my stomach turn, especially knowing that a prof from the school I just graduated from (yay!) is the only Canadian to sign. I have been eager to hear your thoughts on these things, and you did not disappoint.
I, too, am grateful for opportunities to practice generosity with those I disagree with - it's an area of growth for me. But it sure is nice to come to this blog and find encouragement in solidarity with those I tend to agree with. :)
Thank you for your timely Advent words about powerlessness, especially the "nothing to lose" definition of freedom - that has been a theme in my life in the last few months. And thank you for introducing me to those pastors in Liverpool.
I hope you have a restful Christmas!
Hi Beth - it feels great to be back :)
What did you think of Stackhouse's blog about the Manhattan Declaration? He expressed agreement with the theological positions stated - but still got a lot of grief for raising the critique he did. I found that so interesting. What does it say about a group when critique (by an insider no less) can't seem to be tolerated? I appreciated his critique (though I wished he'd taken it a bit further :).
Yes, Stackhouse's blog was where I was introduced to the document, and I, too, was surprised how much flak he got for what he wrote. I think a lot of people were just angry because they thought he was attacking their favorite Big Evangelical Theologians. But some people were genuinely defending the statement and the politics and power-playing that go along with it. That is what I found surprising, especially in much-more-liberal Canada, where it seems "cool" even for Canadian Christians to criticize the extreme right-wingers and religious fundamentalists in the States. I guess not cool for everyone. Also, some of the commenters may have been American.
I appreciated what Stackhouse had to say (if anyone else wants to check it out, visit http://stackblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/the-manhattan-declaration-a-waste-of-everybodys-time/). I think that considering his ties and the public nature of his blog, saying that "the document is strangely useless" and "a waste of time" was as much as he could say (which is interesting considering your points about "nothing to lose").
Personally, I agree with you, that the document not only a useless waste of time, but also a step backwards for the church, written in a spirit and with a philosophy that will have negative impact on our Kingdom announcing, when we consider the way our King laid down His power. I do not know if Stackhouse would say the same (in private), but he might. I have certainly appreciated his quick mind and logic, and have especially learned a lot from him when it comes to issues of faith and public policy (law, pluralism, Christendom, etc.).
Thanks for posting the link to Dr. Stackhouse's blog, Beth. It was an interesting post to read. As were the comments I read.
Good to have you back Wendy! :)
Post a Comment