Archives
Jesus Radicals Blog 2005-2017
![]() Editor’s Note: In part one of this series, Dan Oudshoorn suggested the ease with which Christian communities become flawed, self-congratulatory groups that still look like the middle-class status quo. In this part of the series, Dan challenges the shallow (at best) and colonial (at worst) attempts to relocate into the “bad part of town.” Any talk of Christian community must give priority to the question of what it means to move into more intimate forms of community with people who are marginalized, oppressed, and abandoned. This is not to say that every Christian community must be open to all these people—for example, in our community in Vancouver’s downtown eastside, we quickly realized that we couldn’t focus upon being a safe place for both the low-track female sex workers we met, and for a good many of the homeless men from the neighborhood—but prioritizing one population amongst those who have been abandoned is absolutely essential to developing intentional Christian communities. If, that is, these communities are to be more than self-serving entities that fill the void we have discovered in our own middle-class lives. Because the truth is that it is incredibly easy to establish a community that others will consider ‘radical’ and ‘inspiring’ but that, in actuality, does little or nothing for anybody apart from making those who live in that community feel good about themselves. I know this, because I experienced this. Granted, it wasn’t my intention to do so, but when I was living in Vancouver’s downtown eastside, I was constantly confronted by how easy it was to move into a poor neighborhood, engage in a few acts of hospitality (hosting sex workers for dinner, having strung-out kids stop by to come down from bad trips, allowing some people to crash on our couch) but, all in all, continue to live a life of distinctive privilege and near total insignificance . . . while simultaneously being treated as though I was some sort of Christian superstar. It would have been easy to buy into the hype I was receiving from others—and I know some who live in intentional community settings who have done this—so beware of the respect others will give you. At the very least, it’s a double-edged sword. Recall the ending of the movie, The Devil’s Advocate. If the devil doesn’t get us to serve his purposes through money, sex and power, he’ll get us to serve his purposes by congratulating us on how holy and good we are.
Comments
![]() Editor’s Note: This is the first of a four part series by Dan Oudshoorn exploring some obstacles (and possibilities) in creating liberated communities. In this series, Dan offers a hearty challenge to our rather bourgeois attempts of living into the root of Jesus’ kingdom. It seems particularly appropriate for the Lenten season. I would like to begin by reading a passage from Slavoj Žižek’s recent defense of communism in light of the failures of democratic liberalism and the horrors of global capitalism. This passage relates a joke that isn’t funny (and I warn you–it is vulgar) but it hammers home a point that I hope will be taken very seriously by those of us gathered here today. Let me quote Žižek: In the good old days of Really Existing Socialism, a joke popular among dissidents was used to illustrate the futility of their protests. In the fifteenth century, when Russia was occupied by Mongols, a peasant and his wife were walking along a dusty country road; a Mongol warrior on a horse stopped at their side and told the peasant he would now proceed to rape his wife; he then added: “But since there is a lot of dust on the ground, you must hold my testicles while I rape your wife, so that they will not get dirty!” Once the Mongol had done the deed and ridden away, the peasant started laughing and jumping with joy. His surprised wife asked: “How can you be jumping with joy when I was just brutally raped in your presence?” The farmer answered: “But I got him! His balls are covered in dust!” This sad joke Žižek goes on to say] reveals the predicament of the dissidents: they thought they were dealing serious blows to the party nomenklatura, but all they were doing was slightly soiling the nomenklatura’s testicles, while the ruling party carried on raping the people… By: Brian Miller “I knew my actions were wrong, but I convinced myself that normal rules didn’t apply. I never thought about who I was hurting. Instead, I thought only about myself. I ran straight through the boundaries that a married couple should live by. I thought I could get away with whatever I wanted to. I felt that I had worked hard my entire life and deserved to enjoy all the temptations around me. I felt I was entitled.” ![]() These are the words of a man on a journey of descent. It is not for us to judge whether these words are real or not—or where this descent will lead. The life of Tiger Woods over the last number of months illustrates the universal principle for the human situation, that if we want to experience healing and hope, our journey requires descent. Either we humble ourselves and choose descent, or descent chooses us (because of our own choices). Our gospel lesson calls us again to embrace descent. Luke’s gospel situates the narrative of the temptation of Jesus directly after the “mountain top” experience of his baptism. Now, full of the Holy Spirit, Jesus is led into the wilderness. Somewhere in the course of a forty day fast, Jesus became famished. Jesus is utterly human. He is weak. He is vulnerable. He is dependent on the Holy Spirit. The devil comes to him. Jesus, turn this stone into bread… Jesus, turn this tax return into the good life… Jesus, bless me and expand my territory–my right to buy and use my way to happiness. And while you are at it Jesus, why don’t you take care of the bread problem. You could have such an effective ministry as the Son of God if you would just solve the bread problem in the world. And besides, you look a bit hungry yourself.
The first temptation is framed around the most basic issue of human life—bread. This first temptation (and the other two) are based on a false premise—that Jesus needs to prove he is the Son of God. Jesus is concerned about the bread problem in the world, but this is not the way it will be solved in his kingdom—by miraculous acts of stone into bread. His kingdom IS about bread—both physical and spiritual, but it will require an alternative way of thinking about bread. Bread is the source of life. Every culture, every system, every ideology tells some story about bread and our relationship to it. Capitalism teaches us how to make bread (or anything) and sell it for a profit in the market. Socialism attempts to artificially control the bread market so that all will have an equal amount. On the streets, you do whatever it takes to turn stone into bread. Each of these approaches to bread provides a different way of thinking about our relationship with bread. What does Jesus say about bread? Jesus says that one does not live by bread alone. Jesus says it is not so much about the bread, but about the word of God—the framing story through which we make sense of our lives and the world. The Gospel of the Kingdom is about a different way of being in relationship with bread. So much violence in our world…within ourselves has to do with living in framing stories which establish a distorted relationship with bread. Both with Jesus and with the physical things which are necessary for human life. Questions:
So we don’t depend on Jesus to turn stones into bread to solve the bread problem of our world. Jesus, in his Kingdom, calls us to share our loaves and fishes…or pennies. Second temptation: Glory and Authority in exchange for Power… Jesus, here are all the kingdoms of the world. I will give their glory and all this authority to you… Jesus, here is a list of candidates we need to get elected so your kingdom can come… We have the right candidates in place, the media outlets, the organization to go all the way this time. We have included all the Christian churches in the communication blitz. It’s all set up for your kingdom to come this election…if you just worship me. Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.’” The devil shows Jesus “all the kingdoms of the world.” I’m pretty sure this included the United States of America. Jesus rejects the temptation of bringing his reign in the clothes of the emperor. For much of church history, those who claimed the name Christian have acted as if Jesus got this one wrong. Christendom tried to baptize the state and the way of the sword. We have rejected the way of the cross. We have even thought we can put scripture on our weapons. This is not new. This is all from the same playbook. I’m just not sure it’s the playbook of Jesus. The second temptation is about worship. It is a question of whether we will worship the way of empire—which is always power over. Or, will we worship Jesus, who embraces the way of the cross as the way to bring the Kingdom. Do we recognize the political implications of our worship? Our worship is not an escape from the real world. Quite the opposite, it is a way of coming to grips with an invasion of another life from another world into the present age. Walter Brueggemann says it so well: “The lectionary is unrelenting in its narrative about another life in another world, the one that God wills and gives. Readers are endlessly in the process of deciding, always yet again, for the alternative, refusing the seductions of the ‘belly’-propelled regime.” – Sojourners, February 2010 So this place we are meeting is an embassy of the kingdom of Jesus. Through our baptism, we are made citizens in the kingdom of Jesus—which is a revolution of cross-bearing love. We are given credentials and invited to live as ambassadors of reconciliation. This is our primary identity as disciples. This is what ourbaptism means. This is what it means to be a part of covenant community. This is why it is so important to gather together for common worship—so that we actually are discipled—formed—into this alternative life. Question: How does our common worship center us in a different narrative and equip us to “always yet again” decide for the alternative narrative which rejects the temptation to go after the glory and authority of the current age as a way of bringing the Kingdom of Jesus? Third Temptation: Market-driven Christianity Jesus, why don’t you go up to the temple and throw yourself off. God will protect you. That’s what the Bible says… Jesus, you need to make a name for yourself. How do you expect to have a successful ministry, if you don’t do something spectacular…something to draw a crowd…a following. Jesus, this is just the kind of thing people are looking for. We could really market this. Jesus answered him, “It is said, ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’” Jesus does not opt for the gimmick—jumping off the Temple. Jesus is not driven by ego, or the need to make his ministry appealing to the masses. He is not about putting on a good show. Jesus rejects the temptation to extract the Good News of the Kingdom from ordinary life to the artificial medium of religious antics. His kingdom represents a descent from market-driven Christianity into the messiness of crowds where there are unclean spirits. He calls us to descend with him from our illusions of invincibility and entitlement to the earthy…ordinary way of crosses, suffering-love, humility and repentance. It is appropriate that our gospel reading on this first Sunday of Lent centers around Jesus fasting. Did you see the question in the Saturday paper? Say What (Sat. paper) question/responses: If you had to go a week without technology what would you miss the most and why? The fasting discipline of Lent helps us follow Jesus in resisting the temptations all around us. So hear this invitation from The Book of Common Prayer: I invite you in the name of the Church (Jesus), to self-examination and repentance; by prayer, fasting, and self-denial; and by reading and meditating on God’s holy Word. Like Jesus, may the fullness of the Spirit sustain us as we are led into the wilderness—in our lives and in the world. This too is part of the journey. AMEN By: Michael Iafrate ![]() The publication of Tripp York’s Living on Hope While Living in Babylon marks a significant contribution to the recently re-emerging interest in the connection between Christianity and anarchism and for that reason should be celebrated. Very little scholarship exists regarding these questions, and the less these concerns remain marginal to political theology the better. The book is a revised version of York’s master’s thesis on anarchism and Christianity. Chapter one describes why Christianity and anarchism resonate with one another. Chapter two seeks to go beyond what York calls a merely “revolutionary” type of Christian anarchism toward what he calls an anarchistic “apocalyptic politics.” Chapters three through five each describe Christian individuals or movements whose praxis subverted the “triple axis of evil” of imperial politics described by Martin Luther King, Jr.: materialism, racism, and militarism. These chapters focus, respectively, on the Catholic Worker movement, Clarence Jordan of the Koinonia movement, and the Berrigan Brothers. 2/11/2010 Comments Shalom and Pre-Historic Utopia![]() “They grow no food, raise no livestock, and live without rules or calendars… What do they know that we’ve forgotten?” This is an excerpt from the beginning of a National Geographic article on the Hadza, a small hunter-gatherer tribe in northern Tanzania. Reading this challenged the usual assumptions I’ve had celebrating civilization. As I read about the strange, austere life described in National Geographic, I also felt an odd sense of longing, despair, and hope. This wasn’t the first time I’ve felt this way. In my anthropology and sociology classes in college a lot of my assumptions about the “progress” of civilization was challenged and I became more sensitive to the pervasiveness of these assumptions in Western culture’s mythology. I remember spending a summer in Swaziland and having a conversation about how, in spite of all the negative effects, colonialism was ultimately a good thing because it saved Africans from their unprogressive culture. Just recently, I heard the argument that, in spite of the oppression that resulted from the hierarchy formed in the patristic period (in church history), it was ultimately a good thing because it saved Christianity from remaining a “folk religion.” This disturbs me, and despite many of my concerns about sometimes ideological nature of “primitivism”, I nonetheless think it presents an important challenge to civilization that needs to be wrestled with. Consequently, I will (with a hesitant mistrust of labels) come out now as an advocate of the primitivist critique. I say that simply meaning that I think our love affair with the civilization needs to be questioned, and so far I’ve enjoyed the depth of questioning that results when we are willing to go so far as to engage the idea that a pre-civ lifestyle is the healthiest alternative. 11/25/2009 The Trouble With Thanksgiving![]() Thanksgiving makes me nervous. For years, I’ve gotten a sinking feeling in my stomach as the month of November draws to a close and this day looms. On the one hand, Thanksgiving is about joy and gratitude. It is a time when I travel to see family and friends, welcome a few days of rest and look forward to the holiday season. In my mind, I know it is a good thing to have a day where the sole emphasis is to give thanks to God for all God has done. I also appreciate the opportunity to celebrate all that my loved ones do and are to one another. By: Sarah Lynne Gershon ![]() Recently I have been struggling with what the appropriate response to a Liberationist perspective within my context would be. At Missio Dei [now, the Mennonite Worker], Latin American Liberation theology has influenced a lot of our ideas about what the gospel really means, what Jesus calls us to, and what the Kingdom of God looks like. We’ve talked a lot about becoming family with the poor and marginalized in our context, about questioning the assumptions underlying the accumulation of wealth (embracing jubilee), and rejecting social structures that disempower. As we’ve talked about this, we’ve tried to reorient our lives and adopt practices that will conform us to God’s kingdom and the person of Jesus, but until recently I’m not sure I’ve understood what it means for me to do these things. There is always a tendency within me to believe that I am simply called to give what I have to the poor, to serve them, to somehow leverage my power in such a way to help the poor and marginalized among us. While I think we are called to those things, they are not at the heart of Liberation theology. As long as I reject the basic reorientation of perspective that Liberation theology calls me to, I am still reinforcing the same systems and social structures that dehumanize and disempower. 9/13/2009 Comments Remembering rightly...By: Nekeisha A.B. ![]() The anniversary of September 11, 2001 in the U.S. represents many things to many people. When I do reflect on it, as I am now, it calls to mind a montage of images from my time in the city both during and after that memorialized day. My computer screen with instant messages from friends living in other states, asking for help locating their parents. A solemn, confused, traumatized city filled with posters of missing people. My church family and I, walking together protesting the wars against Afghanistan and later Iraq. Silent demonstrations shrouded in black with signs proclaiming, “Our grief is not a cry for war.” Derek, my friend with developmental disabilities that died years later from the dust and debris he had breathed on that day. But beyond our personal memories, the primary purpose of commemorating this day is American myth-making. Although the pomp and circumstance dedicated to that day may not state it explicitly, the moral of this political story is that the only 11th of September worth remembering is the one in which Americans were attacked and killed; that the only noncombatants worth venerating are ours; that the only civilians that should never experience politically motivated violence from foreign hands live on this soil; that only people who hate freedom and democracy would dare strike at it’s main purveyors and perhaps chief of all that America is always, always innocent. By: Michael Iafrate ![]() The title of Diana Butler Bass’ new book, A People’s History of Christianity, immediately grabbed my attention, as I am a pretty big fan of Howard Zinn. Indeed, Bass’ book is billed as an attempt to write church history “in the same spirit” as Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. With this kind of title and marketing strategy, Bass is likely to attract a lot of readers. The difficult part, though, of modeling a book after such a classic work is that readers and reviewers have no choice but to evaluate the book in light of the original. More specifically, Bass intends to respond to our “posttraditional” situation in which different factions of the church each suffer from their own brand of collective amnesia: conservatives have forgotten the ethical impulse of historic Christianity and progressives/liberals have forgotten the devotional roots of that ethical impulse. Each chapter, then, strives to highlight the devotional and ethical practices of various moments in the church’s history through the narration of the “subversive” and “alternative” stories of ordinary Christians, sidestepping the usual account of “Big-C” Christian history (“Christ, Constantine, Christendom, Calvin and Christian America”) in favor of a more radical, socially engaged story of what Bass calls “generative Christianity.” If this sounds like a big job, it is. Zinn needed close to 700 pages to cover the 200 year history of the united states. The identically-titled scholarly version of A People’s History of Christianity, edited by Richard Horsley, spans seven volumes. That Bass squeezed her people’s history into 300 pages of 13-point font type made me a little skeptical of how much it could possibly cover. ![]() In light of our recent discussions on Jesus Radicals about sexuality within the church, I’d like to discuss some thoughts I’ve had based on a conversation with a friend of mine who recently identified herself as transgendered. This conversation has lead me to think more deeply and seriously about the nature of sexuality, gender, and sin. Her experience was especially interesting to me, because it was something that I felt I could, on a small level, relate to. Before I get too far into that though, I think I need to tell you a little bit of my story in relation to these kinds of topics As I’ve briefly mentioned in my article on female submission, my personality is not generally that of a submissive female. I tend to take on and be comfortable in more dominate roles in relationships. Growing up, I have also been chastised for being too unfeeling or harsh in disagreements, and too logical and cold in debates. I remember talking about (in the “female only” time at youth group) how women should be meek and quieter. As a result, there was always this sense that I wasn’t quite right. |
Disclaimer
The viewpoints expressed in each reader-submitted article are the authors own, and not an “official Jesus Radicals” position. For more on our editorial policies, visit our submissions page. If you want to contact an author or you have questions, suggestions, or concerns, please contact us. CategoriesAll Accountability Advent Anarchism Animal Liberation Anthropocentrism Appropriation Biblical Exegesis Book Reviews Bread Capitalism Catholic Worker Christmas Civilization Community Complicity Confessing Cultural Hegemony Decolonization Direct Action Easter Economics Feminism Heteropatriarchy Immigration Imperialism Intersectionality Jesus Justice Lent Liberation Theology Love Mutual Liberation Nation-state Nonviolence Occupy Othering Pacifisim Peace Pedagogies Of Liberation Police Privilege Property Queer Racism Resistance Resurrection Sexuality Solidarity Speciesism Spiritual Practices Technology Temptation Veganism Violence War What We're Reading On . . . White Supremacy Zionism ContributorsNekeisha Alayna Alexis
Amaryah Armstrong Autumn Brown HH Brownsmith Jarrod Cochran Chelsea Collonge Keith Hebden Ric Hudgens Liza Minno Bloom Jocelyn Perry Eda Ruhiye Uca Joanna Shenk Nichola Torbett Mark VanSteenwyk Gregory Williams Archives
October 2017
|