Throughout the past semester, my class on Religious Pluralism asked the question about Christian identity. This was particularly adjudicated in expression of multiple religious belonging. For example, Panikkar is an ordained priest within the Catholic tradition as well as within the Zen Buddhist tradition. So within the class, it raised the discussion of what it means to actually belong to a particular tradition. Is it public confession, an expressed conversion experience, moral behavior, or rituals such as baptism? In light of such questions, I have decided in this post to just quote Moltmann as an added voice toward Christian identity, a voice to add to this discussion. I do this as much particular local community of believers is preparing for a Pentecost Baptism service.
"Where does the identity of the Christian faith lie? Its outward mark is church membership. This, however, takes us no further, but merely moves the problem on. For the Christian identity of the church is itself questionable, when the form it takes is affected by so many other interests. One can point to the creed. But to repeat the formula of the Apostles' Creed is no guarantee of Christian identity, but simply of loyalty to the fathers and to the tradition. One can point to particular experiences of vocation, conversion and grace in one's life. But even they do not guarantee one's identity as a Christian; at best, they point to what one has begun to believe in such experiences. Ultimately, one's belief is not in one's own faith; within one's experiences in faith and one's decision, one believes in someone else who is more than one's own faith. Christian identity can be understood only as an act of identification with the crucified Christ, to the extent to which one has accepted the proclamation that in him God has identified himself with the godless and those abandonded by God, to whom one belongs oneself. If Christian identity comes into being by this double process of identification, then it is clear that it cannot be described in terms of that faith alone, nor can it be protected against decay by correct doctrinal formulae, repeatable rituals and set patterns of moral behaviour."
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Questioning Social hierarchies
I wrote this in response to these questions found at Epworthpulpit.com.
Analyze your own culture - the one you live and work in everyday. What does it value? Who does it reward? Why? What is its worldview? How are its values changing? What examples can you give that its values are changing? What does your culture teach you? What does it not teach anymore? How does it want you to think and feel?
When we start asking, searching, and contemplating these kinds of questions, we are taking the initial step of a performative ethic. Whenever I tell someone that I have taken or am taking a course in theological ethics, I am almost routinely asked some sort of hypothetical question: ‘6 people are in a raft days from being rescued’ type of scenario. And while this may prove to be a way in which to discuss elements of institutional ethics and theory (deontology, teleology, utility, virtue, etc.), rarely do we take the time to analyze why those decisions are made. Situational ethics took a step toward context, but left behind past experiences, roles, cultural norms, and social hierarchies.
The truth is, we as humans are shaped by systems already in place. Most of us don’t hesitate to buy $80 Nike shoes because we have been shaped to believe Nike is the best brand. Michael Jordan wears Nike; Tiger Woods and Lebron James are the face of Nike. Rarely do we ask the questions of how the shoes are made, where are the shoes made, what people make the shoes, what materials go into the shoe, and how much money goes toward the laborers and how much to the corporation. All we know is that we have been shaped by the millions of dollars that have gone into advertising the stellar performance of Nike gear. Growing up, it was the cool kids who wore the latest Air Jordan’s. Our culture has also taught that the more expensive the shoe/gear/clothing the better it will work and the more people will accept you. So dolling out $80 on shoes fulfills a role within the social norms of both acceptance and capitalism.
Ethics isn’t a type of hypothetical situation in which you have a certain time frame in which to best logically approach a situation. We make hundreds of decisions on a daily basis without even realizing it. This is why the first step in ethics is learning what is going on around you. Why is it that we acquiesced so easily to a war in 2003? Why are guns sales 30% higher now than a year ago? What role does fear play in social institutions? Why is it that black youths are 6 times more likely to be imprisoned for similar crimes than white youths?
We all fit within different hierarchies. We’re white, black, latino, American, Mexican, Iraqi, Christian, Jewish, or Muslim. We are students, employees, and bosses. We all fit within hierarchies and are shaped and formed by the respective roles inherited by the social norms of said hierarchy. But what happens when the hierarchies collide?
There have been whole studies on the nature of social formation in ethics (“The Banality of Good and Evil” by David Blumenthal is an excellent resource). This issue becomes most prevalent when the church hierarchy collides or contradicts with the mores of the nation-state. I have been a Nazarene my whole life, and have a degree from a Nazarene Institution. I have been firmly rooted within holiness doctrine. Our emphasis upon the work of the Spirit, the perfecting love of Christ, and the example of Jesus on the cross culminating in the redemption of creation, a making of all things new, necessarily throws a dark shadow on such demonizing institutions of poverty, racism, and violence. We as a holiness people are called to emulate the work of Christ here on earth. How can we pick up the weapons of the world? In Jesus’ own words, ‘my kingdom is of a different kind.’ Violence is perhaps the most potent of social institutions. Our country was established through genocide of the native people group and then a violent revolution. We make heroes of our violent predecessors throughout our history classes and continue to use war rhetoric that violence is okay as long as freedom results. Very rarely do we think about the people we are becoming, or the devastation it creates in the lives of others (the very others Jesus calls us to love).
For some, this may read as some sort of liberal rant. I assure you that I only write as one who has contemplated, analyzed, prayed, and discussed my social context as a Nazarene holiness Christian. Our culture teaches greed, selfishness, and violence as a way of life. I believe the church teaches not only redemption but liberation from violence, selfishness, and greed. Repentance is a turning away from these systems of destruction to a new life of peace and love. The church ought to start practicing this new hierarchy of social norms. Our ethical decisions are embedded in these practices of nonviolence.
Analyze your own culture - the one you live and work in everyday. What does it value? Who does it reward? Why? What is its worldview? How are its values changing? What examples can you give that its values are changing? What does your culture teach you? What does it not teach anymore? How does it want you to think and feel?
When we start asking, searching, and contemplating these kinds of questions, we are taking the initial step of a performative ethic. Whenever I tell someone that I have taken or am taking a course in theological ethics, I am almost routinely asked some sort of hypothetical question: ‘6 people are in a raft days from being rescued’ type of scenario. And while this may prove to be a way in which to discuss elements of institutional ethics and theory (deontology, teleology, utility, virtue, etc.), rarely do we take the time to analyze why those decisions are made. Situational ethics took a step toward context, but left behind past experiences, roles, cultural norms, and social hierarchies.
The truth is, we as humans are shaped by systems already in place. Most of us don’t hesitate to buy $80 Nike shoes because we have been shaped to believe Nike is the best brand. Michael Jordan wears Nike; Tiger Woods and Lebron James are the face of Nike. Rarely do we ask the questions of how the shoes are made, where are the shoes made, what people make the shoes, what materials go into the shoe, and how much money goes toward the laborers and how much to the corporation. All we know is that we have been shaped by the millions of dollars that have gone into advertising the stellar performance of Nike gear. Growing up, it was the cool kids who wore the latest Air Jordan’s. Our culture has also taught that the more expensive the shoe/gear/clothing the better it will work and the more people will accept you. So dolling out $80 on shoes fulfills a role within the social norms of both acceptance and capitalism.
Ethics isn’t a type of hypothetical situation in which you have a certain time frame in which to best logically approach a situation. We make hundreds of decisions on a daily basis without even realizing it. This is why the first step in ethics is learning what is going on around you. Why is it that we acquiesced so easily to a war in 2003? Why are guns sales 30% higher now than a year ago? What role does fear play in social institutions? Why is it that black youths are 6 times more likely to be imprisoned for similar crimes than white youths?
We all fit within different hierarchies. We’re white, black, latino, American, Mexican, Iraqi, Christian, Jewish, or Muslim. We are students, employees, and bosses. We all fit within hierarchies and are shaped and formed by the respective roles inherited by the social norms of said hierarchy. But what happens when the hierarchies collide?
There have been whole studies on the nature of social formation in ethics (“The Banality of Good and Evil” by David Blumenthal is an excellent resource). This issue becomes most prevalent when the church hierarchy collides or contradicts with the mores of the nation-state. I have been a Nazarene my whole life, and have a degree from a Nazarene Institution. I have been firmly rooted within holiness doctrine. Our emphasis upon the work of the Spirit, the perfecting love of Christ, and the example of Jesus on the cross culminating in the redemption of creation, a making of all things new, necessarily throws a dark shadow on such demonizing institutions of poverty, racism, and violence. We as a holiness people are called to emulate the work of Christ here on earth. How can we pick up the weapons of the world? In Jesus’ own words, ‘my kingdom is of a different kind.’ Violence is perhaps the most potent of social institutions. Our country was established through genocide of the native people group and then a violent revolution. We make heroes of our violent predecessors throughout our history classes and continue to use war rhetoric that violence is okay as long as freedom results. Very rarely do we think about the people we are becoming, or the devastation it creates in the lives of others (the very others Jesus calls us to love).
For some, this may read as some sort of liberal rant. I assure you that I only write as one who has contemplated, analyzed, prayed, and discussed my social context as a Nazarene holiness Christian. Our culture teaches greed, selfishness, and violence as a way of life. I believe the church teaches not only redemption but liberation from violence, selfishness, and greed. Repentance is a turning away from these systems of destruction to a new life of peace and love. The church ought to start practicing this new hierarchy of social norms. Our ethical decisions are embedded in these practices of nonviolence.
Friday, May 8, 2009
First Year is Done.
Well, I finished up my first year. All in all, I feel as if I learned a lot, was stretched in ways that helped me grow, and am looking forward to the four month break. After a week of doing nothing but watching movies and checked out episodes of 'Bones,' I have started to compile my summer reading list. Last week, I read through Rob Bell's new book "Jesus Wants to Save Christians," and this afternoon I started working my way through Moltmann's "The Crucified God." Others making the list include: AJ Levine's "The Misunderstood Jew," St. Augustine's "Confessions," St. Gregory of Nyssa "the Life of Moses," Tolstoy's "The Kingdom of God is within You," and I may pick up Bonhoeffer's "Ethics" again. That's the initial list for now.
Peace.
Peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
