Sunday, February 28, 2010

The Emergent Church and Latter-day Saints: Thoughts on Reading Brian McLaren's New Book


Writing as a pastor, Brian McLaren explains his own disillusionment as a Christian living through the final two decades on the 20th Century.

A large number of both Catholic and Protestant leaders had aligned with a neoconservative political ideology, trumpeting what they called “conservative family values,” but minimizing biblical community values. They supported wars of choice, defended torture, opposed environmental protection, and seemed to care more about protecting the rich from higher taxes than liberating the poor from poverty or minorities from racism. They spoke against big government as if big was bad, yet they seemed to see big military and big business as inherently good. They wanted to protect unborn human life inside the womb, but they didn’t seem to care about born human life in slums or prisons or nations they considered enemies.

His list goes on, but already his point is made. Christianity was being high-jacked at the close of the century and the takeover and makeover of the faith made it difficult for many Christians to identify with a religion that had become a conservative political movement. Some principles were being pounded so hard that they became swollen and exaggerated. Other principles, often more basic and important, were being systematically ignored by those now at the wheel and had become dry and shriveled on a vine that seemed no longer connected to God.

Brother McLaren goes on in his book—and I take the liberty of calling him brother and see him as such—to describe his own day-to-day experience of waking up to “the brutal tension between something real and something wrong in the Christian faith.” His book is a documentary of how he worked through and is still working through those tensions. I think it is an account that quite a few Latter-day Saints would identify with.

I do not say all Latter-day Saints because critical thinking is not given an edge in Mormon culture. We do not even understand the word correctly in its context. Criticism is always seen something negative in our culture; we cannot begin to fathom the existence of something known as critical appreciation, for example. It seems to be an oxymoron. We’ve gone on and contracted the sickly habit of subserving thought to authority, conscience to office, and personal revelation to corporate dominion. We are not, however, a spiritually dead people. We know the difference between something that is real and something that has gone wrong, between the ideal once proclaimed from the pulpit, and the day-to-day betrayal of the archetype.

It seems to me that very worst thing spiritual people can to is to idealize the shortfall into a true substance, to speak for something wrong as if it were something real and thus betray the genius of their faith. This is almost always done by converting the spiritual gifts of God into an office that—in effect—bypasses the mantel. As in the saying, “The King is dead. Long live the king” without thought or prayer. In the secular world, few of us see George Bush as our Washington or Barak Obama as our Jefferson. Americans are far more likely to apply the skills of critical thinking and realize, along with Joseph Smith, that “every man lives for himself” and must, therefore, be his own person and make his own record.

But we contradict ourselves in spiritual realms and always see the President of the Church as “our Moses” or our Joseph Smith. We talk about mantels when the President of the Church passes away, but these mantels falling off their hooks are a dime-a-dozen in Church History and so many of us rise to proclaim supposed visions even before the signature is dry upon a death certificate. As is often the case, our eagerness to get behind a process invalidates our witness. When our own sacred experiences always seem to validate the status-quo, our own loyalty has perhaps slipped a little, like a mantel from off of our shoulders. We have switched the more public mantel, so-to-speak, from the right shoulder of God to the left holder of office—in the blinking of an eye.

I think it is safe to say that, while we’ve always had both liberal and conservative trends among us—as we’ve had liberal and conservative church leaders—we also did see, in the closing decades of the twentieth century, a conservative takeover and makeover of our faith. While the makeover is visible in various offices of the church-wide leadership, a more profound sea change is felt in the more subterranean offices the Mormon curia—the mid to lower management levels of church hierarchy. Here we see the same “conservative family values” have all but replaced “biblical community values”—those that Jesus referred to as the weightier matters of justice and mercy. In taking up the same old conservative platform as did the Evangelicals, we coveted “that which is but the drop” and neglected these more weighty matters.

The gospel that Jesus restored through Joseph Smith clearly put the weight back upon “biblical community values.” It does not leave the other undone, but with clear purpose it sets forth a liberal social agenda that far outstripped any Christian social enterprise envisioned in Smith’s century. One can debate ‘isms’ to a point. Is the Law of Consecration, for example, socialism or communism? But no fair reader of the Restoration’s scriptural texts or of the historical documents can mistake it for unbridled capitalism—indeed, as capitalism at all. Restoration scriptures damn and curse social inequality and call upon men to see themselves as stewards of God’s material blessings, not owners. All of us are commanded in the Book of Mormon to impart of these blessings freely. God made it clear through Joseph Smith that his intent was economic equality—a thing unheard of in capitalism. He did this by applying the imagery of Isaiah’s valleys and mountains to the present day poor and rich. “The poor shall be exalted,” he proclaimed, “in that the rich are made low.”

For too long, Christians who have felt in their heart a commitment to the weightier things of the Gospel, have sat on their hands in church classes and said not a thing. We have not raised our voices when we had the opportunity and we have allowed others to minimize these weightier values. We are in danger of letting Mormonism also become a conservative movement when it should have been the emergent church. I’ll tell you where I have seen the prophetic mantel fall. It has fallen upon us and we are shrugging it off.

____________

Brian McLaren's "A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions That Are Transforming the Faith" is published by HarperOne, 2010, New York, New York.

Sunday, February 21, 2010

The Hickory-Dickory-Dock of Capitalism ~ A Homily Based on Philippians 1-3


To be a Christian is to come up against Capitalism because Christianity runs counter-clockwise to the hickory-dickory-dock of conservative economics. For example, there is St. Paul's exhortation to the church at Philippi. Because King James butchers the translation, we will quote from the respectable New Revised Standard Version, but any reliable translation will be in accordance.

"Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit," Paul advises while acknowledging that some Christians even preach Christ in such a fashion. But, rather, "regard others as better than yourselves. Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others." Not only is this a counter to capitalistic dogma, which depends upon and excites self-interest as its chief motivating factor, but, according to Paul, it comes reflects perfectly the mind of Jesus,

"who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be exploited,
but emptying himself,
took on the form of a slave,
being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to the point of
death—
even death on a cross.”

One would have a very difficult time painting a more contradictory path of discipline than this is to Capitalism.

• We must set aside our own interest in preference to the interest of others.
• We must not exploit our own talents or the assets of those who we know and network with.
• We must empty our own coffers for the sake of those in need, doing so even to the point of death.

John the Baptist makes it clear that our own increase is not the point. “He must increase,” John says, speaking of Jesus, “but I must decrease.” How serious is this doctrine to Paul? He tells the Philippian saints to count every temporal gain as a loss within the Christian brotherhood and all things lost as rubbish or dung compared to this vision of what is in the mind of Christ. He wants to be like Christ, to be emptied of all things, and to share in his sufferings, that he might also know and share in his resurrection.

None of this is to say that Christians cannot be capitalists, only that insofar as they are they are greatly hindered thereby. “Some proclaim Christ from envy and rivalry,” Paul says, “out of selfish ambition. What does it matter? Just this, that Christ is proclaimed in every way, whether out of false motives or true; and in that I rejoice.” But if we are to do more than proclaim him—if we are to follow him—we must set our faces counter-clockwise, against the hickory-dickory-dock.

Friday, February 12, 2010

A Way to Avoid Herod ~ Extracts from a Sermon on Epiphany by William Sloane Coffin


"Those who first beheld the Christ went back to what they were doing [that is, back to their routine]. The shepherds went back to their sheep. And of the wisemen we read, 'They returned home another way."

"That was, you remember, because they were warned in a dream to avoid Herod.

"There is an important contrast to be made between the authority of Christ and the power of Herod, or perhaps we should say, the authoritarianism of Herod. Spiritual authority has the power of conviction. Authoritarianism has the power of coercion. Whenever the church tries to coerce, it robs itself of spiritual authority.

"Each Christian, within the institutions of our society, must...become an institution embodying at all times and in all places the humanity we see in the face of Christ. It is Christ who defines us, not Herod. To redeem the routine, we must return home another way.

"Christ redeems the routine first and foremost by telling us not what to do but how to be--full of wonder, peace and care, and concern for one another, eager even as God is eager to make humanity more human.

"There are really endless possibilites for those who, like the wisemen we recall today, follow a star. The wisemen were wise because they had a cat-like ability to see in the dark, to see in the night a bright light of hope. 'They returned home another way.' God grant us that we too after Christmas may return home another way. To business as usual? No, to business as never before!"

Tuesday, February 09, 2010

Modern Mormonism: We won! Now what?


"Well, President Monson, we got what we prayed for. Johnston's Army is gone, and so is Brigham. Persecutions are over, unless we instigate them. And we can all shop 'til we drop. The Church is a Fortune 50 juggernaut, Utah is ours to command, and Mitt waits in the wings. We won ! Now what?"

Read Ed Firmage's wonderful Opinion Piece in the Salt Lake City Tribune. Copy and paste this link into your Internet address box.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_14342435?source=most_viewed

Saturday, February 06, 2010

Haiti and the Jubilee Year





As one begins to look into Haiti and tries to understand how it is that Haiti became so poor, a few things become clear. First, it is important to know that Haiti was a French slave colony that won its independence by agreeing to reimburse slaveholders for their "property." The debt this new nation took on was enormous. For over one hundred years, from the mid-19th century through the mid-20th century, Haiti continued to make burdensome payments to France. They were able to get out from under that debt only by refinancing it through a multitude of other nations, the United States and Great Brittan among them. Their leadership--corrupt or otherwise--has continued to find it necessary to refinance that debt. As any homeowner knows, one never gets to the principle this way and interest continues to accrue.

The IMF is now offering relief in the form of continued loans--another opportunity to rebuild its hourse upo n sand. France, however, has called for international forgiveness of debt--irony of ironies. I'm all for that. I'm all for France returning the blood money they extracted from these poor people. I believe in the jubilee year of debt forgiveness for poor nations. We have played a part in continuing Haiti's poverty. I think this is the morally correct response and also an essential home security response. We cannot continue to create conditions that breed anti-American terrorism.

I urge all of my friends to fully study this issue. You can begin here. http://www.jubileeusa.org/ This is a real an opportunity to put our Judeo-Christian values to work in a way that lifts people up and lets the oppressed go free. It is a chance to work toward the prophetic vision of the Old Testament seers. Christians can stand on the correct side of our nation's pocket book and it is way past time for us to do so. Help Haiti begin to rebuild upon a solid rock.