Showing posts with label Christ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christ. Show all posts

Sunday, April 3, 2016

Slow of Heart

Endorse SB 484 and HB 1835
Working the past few weeks on redistricting reform issues, I’ve found myself caught in circular conversations where the same questions are asked and answered, the same ground covered again with no apparent shift.

Why a constitutional reform? Why now? Why not another approach? Why these allies? Why this timeframe?

It seems clear to me that allowing politicians to draw maps for their own electoral districts is a conflict of interest with a host of implications for representation and governance. And it seems clear that the best, maybe only real solution is to change how the lines are drawn.

And to do that requires a constitutional amendment, which takes years. So either this happens now, or we wait another decade.

Our coalition, Fair Districts PA, launched a petition this week asking legislators to support redistricting reform. (If you live in PA and haven’t signed it, please do, right here). I can understand legislators resisting this change: they have power and want to keep it.

What I don’t understand are those who claim to be allies who won’t support the effort, won’t promote the petition, and waste precious time in the same circular discussions.

In the days following Easter, reading in the final chapters of Luke, I was struck once again by how hard is was for the followers of Christ to grasp that he had risen.

The downcast men on the road to Emmaus had the evidence they needed, but they were stuck in confusion. Jesus had died, the women had reported his resurrection, but to the men it didn’t add up.

The Disciples, George Roualt, 1939 Paris
They had the testimony of the women, the testimony of the empty tomb, but more than that: they had Jesus walking right there beside them. But they couldn’t accept what they’d been told, couldn’t see him right there with them.

Even when he said “how foolish you are, and slow of heart to believe all the prophets have spoken,” they didn’t see it was him, didn’t grasp what he was saying.

That phrase has traveled with me this week: how foolish you are, and slow of heart.

We live inside our own limitations. We have experiences and expectations that shape what we’re able to see and believe.

Sometimes we hold those limitations tightly: it might cost us power, or privilege, funding, friends, to see from another angle, to set prejudice aside.

We tell ourselves we want to know the truth and are open to new perspectives, but how often is that a friendly lie we tell ourselves while ignoring evidence that points in new directions?

Am I wasting my time on redistricting reform? Compared to some of the larger questions of life that’s a small one, but for me, right now, worth asking.

I set out the evidence I have, the frustrations, potential, limited resources, possible outcomes. God has led me in many strange directions over a lifetime of job changes and volunteer investment. Is this where I’m to invest today? I believe it is. I pray I’m open to redirection.

And what of those circular conversations, rehearsing the same questions, the same evidence? As I look for new ways to explain strategies and direction, I find myself wondering: are these honest questions, or ways to hide alternative agendas?  Is there a real desire to do the right thing, or is the goal to look supportive while subverting forward motion?

In politics the plays for power are not always obvious.

In other arenas that’s even more the case.

I’ve seen disastrously foolish decisions made, in direct conflict to all evidence, driven by hidden personal agendas and surrounded by spiritual language about prayer and God’s leading.

I’ve seen power grabs masquerade as ministry, mercy, marital harmony, good fiscal management.

Folly is never far away.

And we are all, so often, slow of heart.

How much of that slowness of heart on the road to Emmaus was tied to tradition?

Those men had grown up in a framework that expected one kind of messiah: political, powerful, punishing, patriarchal.

Their kind of messiah wouldn’t place himself in the hands of his pursuers.

Wouldn’t stand silent in the face of his accusers.

Wouldn’t die without accomplishing all they believed that he should do.

The Empty Tomb, Jesus Mafa, 1970s North Cameroun
They were drawn to Jesus. But tied to their own narrative framework.

And how much of that slowness of heart was tied to gender?

“Some of our women astounded us.” 

The Greek word, “existemi,”  translated  here “astounded” or “astonished”, literally means out of line, out of bounds, out of one’s mind, radically altered. In some places it’s translated bewitched, or insane.

Those women: What were they thinking? Who could believe them?


Who did they think they were, so confident in what they’d seen, speaking of angels, insisting Jesus was alive!

To really hear them would require a complete shift in the prevailing belief that God spoke to men, Jewish men, only Jewish men. Never women.

I find myself wondering how much we miss, insisting the message come in the form we most prefer, ignoring those we’ve decided God would never use.

I look at the places where we are most divided and wonder what foolishness and slowness of heart keep us from hearing God’s word of unity.

I look at our churches and wonder, what foolishness, what slowness of heart, keeps us locked in debating the same old tired questions:

How old the earth is. Really, does that matter? Read with new eyes. Listen with a larger language. Let's stop the myth that science and faith conflict.

The role of women: Any! Every! What petty prerogative dares to dictate terms to the daughters of God, co-heirs and co-workers with Christ himself?

The role of the Holy Spirit? Amazing how many conversations I’ve heard debating what God Himself can and can’t do. What blessings and power we miss trying to cram the Spirit of God into our chronological constructs.

Abortion? We shout past each other rather than really listen, to the struggle of single moms, the heartbreak of unsupportive workplaces, the lack of affordable housing, adequate medical care, reasonable parental leave.

Gender identity and marriage? I see a great deal of folly and slowness of heart in almost every direction. I am slow of heart myself in this space, unable to see what God has in mind.

Walking a woodland trail after a rainy day, thinking and praying about my own areas of folly, my own slowness of heart in arenas where I struggle to see God’s hand, I am struck by the tiny voices I hear around me. Some bird calls are very familiar: the cheer cheer cheer of the cardinal, then its loud, metallic “chip!” The  anxious call of the wood duck, speeding by overhead. But the woods are full of tiny whispers I can’t describe and can’t identify, soft enough you could walk right past them, gentle enough if I said “what’s that sound?” most friends would answer “what sound?”

Yet I know people who would hear what I hear, and more, and hearing, could tell me what I hear, point out where to look: maybe a contented kinglet, high in a tree, murmuring delight at the most recent bug? Maybe a brown creeper, low on a tree trunk, whispering plans to hop to the next tree?

I know people who are like that in hearing what God is doing:  they’ve spent a lifetime in listening, waiting, praying, studying scripture. I can often sense the Holy Spirit moving, yet so often miss the point. Listen, I say, and others stare blankly: to what? Yet some, a rare, treasured few, know what I’m asking, listen with me, and can often hear what I’ve only, almost, guessed at.

Watching sunlight streak across my muddy path, I wonder how I would have responded if I had been one of those Jesus met on the road to Emmaus.

I long for wisdom, quickness of heart. Pray to be one who sees and recognizes Jesus.

And I pray for all those I know and love. Those who follow Christ, yet are slow of heart in other things: slow of heart to set down their own agendas. Slow of heart to welcome and love.

And I pray for those who have taken another path: slow of heart to believe. Slow of heart to see enduring love walking right beside them. 

Sunday, April 13, 2014

Invitation to the Cross

As part of my Lenten observation this year, I'm taking a break from writing new blog posts and updating and re-posting earlier material. Today's post was first shared on April 1, 2012.  For another Holy Week post from the past, consider also Thank You for the Cross, April 17, 2011.

Black Crucifixion, Fritz Eichenberg, 1963, New York
And God held in his hand
A small globe. Look,
he said.
The son looked. . .

On a bare
Hill a bare tree saddened
The sky. Many people
Held out their thin arms
To it,
As though waiting
For a vanished April
To return to its crossed
Boughs. The son watched
Them. Let me go there, he said.

  (from "The Coming," R. S. Thomas)

There is something unsettling about the story of Palm Sunday. Crowds gathered to cheer a likely candidate, one of their own who could draw a crowd, who could take back Jerusalem from the evil empire, who could promote their agendas and ensure their safety.

It’s easy to picture the crowd. The objects waved might be different (flags? pennants? streamers?), but the energy is the same.

It’s not so easy to picture Jesus, riding the donkey through the crowd. Luke says, "as he approached Jerusalem he wept.”

Not normal hero behavior.

Did the crowd notice? Did they wonder why?

With the cheers of the adoring crowd echoing in his ears, Jesus went on to the temple, where he upset the economic order by throwing over tables: money changers, merchants of sacrificial doves, commerce sent scrambling. The accommodating (well-recompensed?) religious leaders were enraged: how dare he?

From there, he went on to tell a series of stories meant to alienate the insiders, the holders of power, those most convinced of their own righteousness.

Then the Passover meal, with talk of sacrifice and death, and the embarrassing scene with the bowl and towel.

Foot Washing,  Gunning King, 1936, UK
It’s an odd story, shifting from adoration, to alienation, to anticipated grief.

There’s nothing in the story that sounds invented, “mythic,” polished.

It’s told in each of the gospels with a sense of quiet amazement, with a raw honesty unexpected in religious text. Facts outlined, dialogue sketched, strange stories reported as the lauded candidate for coming king deliberately dismantles the grand expectations of friends, followers and crowd.

.
Vinoth Ramachandra, a Sri Lankan who has written and lectured extensively about pluralism, world religions, and the uniqueness of the Christian faith, notes in The Scandal of Jesus: Christ in a Pluralistic World:
If you wanted to convert the educated and pious people of the empire to your cause, whatever that cause may have been, the worst thing you could ever do would be to link that cause to a recently crucified man. To put it mildly, that would have been a public relations disaster. And to associate God, the source of all life, with this crucified criminal was to invite mockery and sheer incomprehension! This was indeed the experience of the first Christians
This message, if true, subverted the world of religion. For it claimed that if you wanted to know what God is like, and to learn God’s purposes for God’s world, you had to go not to the sages, the lofty speculations of the philosophers or to the countless religious temples and sacred groves that dotted the empire, but to a cross outside the walls of Jerusalem. The world of the first Christians was every bit as pluralistic, if not more so, than ours- culturally and religiously. But for the Jews a crucified Messiah/Saviour was a contradiction in terms, for it expressed not God’s power but God’s inability to liberate Israel from Roman rule. For pious Greeks and Romans, the idea that a god or son of a god should die as a state criminal, and that human salvation should depend on that particular historical event, was not only offensive, it was sheer madness.
This message, if it were true, also subverted the world of politics. It claimed that Rome’s own salvation would come from among those forgotten victims of state terror. Caesar himself would have to bow the knee to this crucified Jew. It implied that by crucifying the Lord of the universe, the much-vaunted civilization of Rome stood radically condemned. The Pax Romana was a sham peace. Like all imperial projects, it was built on the suffering of the many. And God had chosen to be found among the victims, not the empire-builders. Little wonder that the Christians’ ‘Good News’ (‘Gospel’) was labeled a ‘dangerous superstition’ by educated Romans of the time.
Now, it is the madness of this ‘word of the cross’ that compels us to take it seriously. I am a Christian today because there is something so foolish, so absurd, so topsy-turvy about the Christian gospel that it gets under my skin: it has the ring of truth about it. No one can say that this was some pious invention, for it ran counter to all notions of piety. And nothing was gained by it. All who proclaimed it suffered as a result.
Ramanchandra goes on to explore further the subversive nature of the cross: it subverts not only our ideas of religion and political power, but of self, autonomy, family, tribe, national identity:
White Crucifixion, Marc Chagall, 1938, Russia
"When illustrating what it means to belong to the kingdom of God, Jesus takes as his paradigmatic examples those who had least status in his contemporary society. In a world where children had no legal rights, economic possessions or no social standing, he makes them the model for those who receive the kingdom of God (Matt.18: 1-4; Mark 10: 13-16). When, on the eve of the crucifixion, he washes the feet of his disciples like a household slave, and requires them to do the same for each other (John 13:3-15), he makes slaves the paradigms for leadership in the kingdom of God. If the kingdom of God belongs to people such as slaves, the poor, and little children, then others can enter the kingdom only by accepting the same lack of status. The cross brings all human beings, men and women, rich and poor, religious and irreligious, to the same level before God. It is at the foot of the cross, that all human beings, without exception, are revealed as the objects of God’s forgiving and re-creating love. This is the egalitarian politics of grace." 
Jesus doesn’t invite us to Palm Sunday, to a triumphal politics of power, a proud exclusionary religion of exceptional righteousness.

He invites us to the cross, to the foot of the cross, to align ourselves not only with him, but with every marginalized, forgotten, condemned person who ever lived.  He calls us to set aside status, entitlement, self-justifying argument, self-protective agenda, and find a new home in his family of grace.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, struggling to understand the call of the cross in the face of Nazi fascism, wrote: 
“The Cross is not the terrible end of a pious happy life. Instead, it stands at the beginning of community with Jesus Christ. When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.” (from  Discipleship and the Cross )
Come and die.
Christ of the Homeless, Fritz Eichenberg, 1982, New York
Jesus said “greater love has no one than this than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command. . . This is my command: Love each other.”
The Christian faith is more than words, buildings, organizational structures, theological frameworks, philosophical exposition, like-minded people sharing like-minded values. At its core, the Christian faith is a community of deeply broken, deeply loved people, knit together by allegiance to a dying friend on a distant hill, choosing each day to sacrifice personal preference and self-fulfillment for the needs of a deeply wounded world.

Come and die. Not great ad copy. Not a catchy campaign slogan.

Yet that call sounds across the centuries, and we can trace the outlines of history through the lives of those who have understood and answered that call.

Please join the conversation. Your thoughts and experiences in this are welcome. Look for the "__ comments" link below to leave your comments.