A Closer Look at Life

Them: Part II

I realize the claim with which I ended my last post may come across as rather far fetched to some.  Christianity has gotten poor scores on inclusivity throughout its history, and in contemporary America, there are few organizations except the NRA that are popularly regarded as being more reactionary and irrationally, combatively traditionalist.

Elements of secular humanism, on the other hand, have led the charge in the last century to preach a message of unity and connectedness in our increasingly factionalized world. In doing so, I believe they have hit upon perhaps the greatest question facing mankind today. How are we supposed to get along?

As two centuries of global political order based on the nation-state as the primary political actor wanes, we see an increased movement towards ethno-specific or religiously exclusivist self-identification. In response to the homogeneity of market capitalist-led globalism, people are turning to ethnicity, religion, geography, language, culture and even subculture to try to define the boundaries of the people group to whom they will swear allegiance.  It can appear that we are moving backwards away from the unity of humanity that had been such a fervent hope for much of the last century.

I have not studied every one of the worlds religions in depth, but to my limited experience, every other system of belief on the planet has its boundaries. Some contain a linguistic barrier such as Islam, or ethnic designations such as Judaism. Those which are more inclusive on those terms still stop short of true inclusiveness by mandating practices of dress, behavior, diet and worship that are inextricably tied to their culture of origin. Some systems of belief are so tied to their respective culture or polities that them is a political term, with no spiritual or relational component even coming into consideration.

The fact is, there is no religion on earth that preaches the radical sort of inclusiveness that Christianity proclaims.  Even the Uniterian Universalists (who have no creeds and therefore no comprehensive belief at all) and Bahá’I (whose amalgamation of multiple religions is logically inconsistent in that it believes mutually exclusive claims of differing religions to be related to each other in a process of progressive revelation) do not go to the extremity that Christ does.

Make no mistake. Christians have a positively awful track record of practicing this culture-crossing, barrier-breaking inclusiveness. For the past two millennia, uncounted horrors have been perpetrated on mankind in the name of Christ. From the Crusades to the Inquisition, the Conquistadors to the KKK, the cross of Christ has been used as a weapon in truly appalling ways. Christ on the other hand, saw things differently.

To properly understand Christ’s views on this issue, one has to distinguish between the regrettable actions of Christians and the teachings and actions of Christ.  Christians exhibiting violence, hatred and divisiveness are not proper examples of their faith. On the contrary, Christians are the only people to whom their respective deity has given a mandate to love everyone, as well as providing the power to carry out that divine vision of unity.

In brief, Christ commanded his disciples to love all people everywhere as though they were family. Something does not come from nothing in this world, and love is no exception.  God, through Christ has chosen to love mankind so completely, so radically, so deeply that were we to recognize and respond to that love, there would be no end to the love that we could give to our fellow man. 

What is more, Christ gave us only one defining characteristic of the love that we are to show for everyone.  “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.”

This simple line introduced to mankind a definition of sacrificial love unparalleled in any other system or belief or thought that had come before or has arisen since.  Christ did not set out parameters for the worthiness of being loved that someone must show.  HE did not say that political boundaries, racial differences or religious disparities could be used as excuses not to love someone.  HE did not tell us the point at which we are allowed to seek selfish ambition at the expense of others.  HE did not give us an out when love has become difficult or costly.  Barriers and boundaries set upon the love God lavished on and entrusted to mankind were set by man himself.  On the contrary, Christ has commanded those who would follow him to seek out self-sacrificing, costly, love for their fellow man without regard to any of the differences we humans seek to identify and accentuate.

What then, does this have to do with politics?  How does this definition of love really constitute the hope of the world? 

More to come…

Them

One of my frustrations with the blogosphere, and contemporary American culture at large, is that it is not well suited to topics that take more than 500 words to cover. Communication must adapt, however, and in every system, there is a solution. In today’s media, it is called “To be continued…”

Over the next few posts I will be dealing with some larger issues that I have refrained from addressing due to my inability to express myself succinctly on certain topics. Hopefully, these multi-part posts will provide the proper venue for dealing with these issues. They might also be dramatically dull, but they are immensely fascinating to me. Hopefully they will be worthwhile to some degree.

I recently had a long, long conversation with a friend of mine about the utility, purpose and worth of the Gospel, particularly as it relates to the confusing world we live in. I stated that I believed the Gospel to be the only hope for mankind; a strong claim in a pluralistic world where we find increasing incompatibilities and mutual incomprehensibilities across the broad spectrum of religious, ethnic and cultural divides.

My friend’s position, and a compelling one it is, questions whether the great weight of the innumerable failings of the church over the last two millennia crowd out the good it has done, and even draws into question its validity as an institution in the first place, let alone its ability to claim any sort of superiority over other systems of belief.

He is not alone in this opinion, of course. There are many who would agree with him asking what right the church has to claim any moral or ideological high ground. Crosby, Stills and Nash summed up the sentiment of this dissenting opinion well in the chorus of their song “Cathedral.”

“Too many people have lied in the name of Christ
For anyone to heed the call.
So many people have died in the name of Christ
That I can't believe it all.”

What argument is there to support the Gospel against these accusations? While there are many Christians who lack the capacity to explain or defend their beliefs at all, much of the remainder would attempt to defend of their faith through some kind of dissertation on the wonder of Salvation, the truth and importance of the Resurrection, attempt a comparative analysis of Christianity vis-a-vis other religious systems or get caught in the quagmire of attempting to defend the historicity of the Scriptures.

All of these defenses have value insomuch as they help explain the what of Christianity, but, salvation aside, they don’t go very far down the road of explaining why, which is the essential question in the first place. At least not the why our culture is asking. To explain that why, you have to find something that is unique, something that is intrinsically and uniquely valuable which is the sole purview of the Christian Faith.

This explanation mush be universal and translatable beyond the borders of cultures, nation-states, ethnicities and languages. It must be a hope that can live within any cultural context without destroying it. It must address to the essence of our humanity, rather than a particular expression of it. It must have a solution for the suffering and divisiveness that is now so visibly endemic in our world.

The reason I believe the Gospel is the one hope of the world is that I believe it holds just such a universal hope that addresses a universal need. I believe it is the only system of belief that doesn’t have a “them.”

To be continued...

In other words...

One of the main reasons I post so infrequently to this blog is arrogance about my own words and thoughts.  I prize originality very highly, and have to confess that I often judge those who copy the words of others in place of generating their own ideas or expressions. The downside to this is that I often fail to pass on the words and ideas that inspire me; words and ideas that are probably better than mine.

There are times, however, when something cuts through the fog. The following is an allegedly Franciscan blessing whose origin I do not yet know.  Some preliminary research has not revealed its history, but it appears to be popular with Episcopalians and discontented, artsy evangelical bloggers.  (wait a minute...)

Regardless of its origin, the following is probably dangerous if prayed earnestly.  That could also make it deeply important. Whether you approach it as a prayer, a blessing or simply an expansion of perspective, it is a valuable little set of hopes.

May God bless you with discomfort at easy answers, half truths, and superficial relationships, so that you may live deep within your heart.
Amen.

         

May God bless you with anger at injustice, oppression, and exploitation of people, so that you may work for justice, freedom and peace.
Amen.

         

May God bless you with tears to shed for those who suffer from pain, rejection,starvation and war, so that you may reach out your hand to comfort them and to turn their pain into joy.
Amen.

         

May God bless you with enough foolishness to believe that you can make a difference in this world, so that you can do what others claim cannot be done.
Amen.

         

And the Blessing of God, who Creates, Redeems and Sanctifies, be upon you and all you love an pray for this day, and forever more.
Amen.

Amen indeed.

Busy signals

It should be painfully obvious by now that I am having some problems keeping up with this blog.  I would like to say it is the crazy pace of life that we live here in America, but that is only part of the problem. (In and of itself, this is quite a statement about the journey that I am currently on as I process the events that led to the creation of this little site.)

To be honest, life has been busy.  I doubt many Americans who are actively engaged in their jobs and social circles have a tremendous amount of free time for ventures on the side.  I am no exception.  Beyond the harried pace, I find that there is something else that has kept me from posting.  I simply don’t know what to say.

It is no secret that trying to live a moderately productive life here in America has an anesthetic affect on the soul and the mind.  To keep either alive, you must constantly seek out stimulating circumstances and people, or be exposed to a great amount of pain.  Perhaps lamentably, most Americans don’t seem to have time for the first, and as humans we all have a natural aversion to the second. 

This is what has happened to me in the last few months.  I feel that the jarring experience of seeing poverty and destitution first hand are now quite distant to me, as though I were on lithium (at least from what I have heard of the experience) and the world is passing by just outside my reach. 

I find myself dealing with the quandary that many evangelical Christians experience spiritually, and many of my generation at large experience emotionally.  I am trying to find out what to do when the bright, hot fire of emotional, engrossing experience that woke me up from the daze of living day to day has dimmed to a small ember in a bed of grey ashes. 

I am honestly at a loss as to what to do about what I have seen.  Perhaps this is the quintessential challenge of my generation.  We are increasingly aware of the suffering and injustice in the world, and yet we are, by and large, incapable of doing anything substantive about it.

For me, the confusing and disheartening part is not the fraud and abuse that plagues international aid agencies or the ignorant, abusive, draconian policies of governments around the world. It isn’t even the seemingly paltry means I have at my disposal to enact change. 

The challenge is not knowing what to do with my own life. 

This blog is evidence of this.  However militantly intent I may have been about this being a mouthpiece for the poor that I met in Ethiopia, it has been dying on the vine for months as I get on with the business of having a wife to love, a job to work and, in general, a life to live.  Even this simple act of attempting to publicize my thoughts about injustice in the world has turned into a commentary on my own place in the ranks of busy, self-focused Americans I am in the habit of decrying.

I do not condemn myself for this.  Rather I lament it.  Perhaps I am coming to discover a little of what Jesus was talking about when he was here on earth.  While He never said it outright, I don’t think He understood that you only have time to live one life.  If you are intent on taking care of yourself and managing your life, you aren’t likely to have much time left over to help other people out.

What is more, when you are busy, you don’t have a lot of time to look around and listen

At any rate, I expect to be posting again more frequently, although the topics and focus of this blog are likely to change a little over the next few posts. 

If you are out there reading, thanks for sticking around, particularly through this uniquely introspective (self-absorbed?) post.