Un Pentecostés Emergente

Tomado de USA Today (HT: Michael Kruse)…

La población en los Estados Unidos de América alcanzará los 438 millones de habitantes para 2050 y la población hispana se triplicará, de acuerdo a las proyecciones entregadas el lunes por el “Pew Research Center”.

Las últimas proyecciones de este grupo de investigación no partisano son mayores que los estimados gubernamentales realizados hasta la fecha y pintan un retrato de una América drmáticamente diferente a la actual.

… Aun si la inmigración se limita, el segmento hispano de población se incrementará porque su tasa de natalidad es superior a la del resto de la población. Esto en gran manera se debe a que los inmigrantes hispanos son más jóvenes que los “baby boomers” nativos (un “baby boom” es un periodo de gran incremento en la tasa de nacimientos, y por extensión se denomina “baby boomers” a los nacidos durante esos años). Para 2030, todos los 79 millones de “boomers” serán mayores de 65 años, y los ancianos crecerán más que cualquier otro grupo de edad.

Este reporte predice que para 2050, el 19% de los americanos serán extranjeros y que el 29% de la población será hispana (con un 47% de blancos, 13% de afroamericanos y 9% de asiáticos).

Sigo reiterando este tema, pero es que es una realidad cambiante en donde debemos anticipar nuestra eclesiología. Sé que la Iglesia Emergente no es simplemente un grupo de “amigos blancos intelectuales”, pero no veo una discusión significativa al respecto. La mayoría de denominaciones y grupos no están tomando parte en esto, excepto aquellos que se encuentran en zonas que han tenido presencia latina por décadas.

Y, nos guste o no, cuando uno habla sobre latinos y fe, uno debe necesariamente lidiar con el catolicismo o el pentecostalismo, y la forma particular en que los latinos han abrazado estas tradiciones.

En el Pentecostés, gentes de todas partes del mundo conocido estuvieron unidas por medio del Espíritu de Dios. Fue un regreso a la Torre de Babel. Si los movimientos emergentes que estamos experimentando hoy son fieles al Espíritu de Dios, necesitamos un Pentecostés emergente, una gran reunión de voces uniéndose como testigas de las nuevas cosas que el Espíritu de Dios hace en nuestra tierra.

Qué estoy sugiriendo? Bueno, tengo varios pensamientos dispersos que quiero darles a conocer. Y desearía si ustedes pudieran comentar y también añadir algunas de sus ideas. Opinemos todos sobre estos temas:

• Quisiera ver en JesusManifesto artículos escritos en español. Voy a buscar la manera de colocar una imagen para que la gente escoja en que idioma quiere leer. De seguro que habrá algunas traducciones no muy bien hechas, pero si más y más artículos son escritos en español, estaré más que contento de buscar la forma de traducirlos al inglés. Por supuesto que con todo gusto aceptaré cualquier voluntario para las traducciones.
• Estoy ansioso por colocar cualquier cosa que quieran escribir sobre cómo podemos aprender de la cultura latina tanto en nuestro quehacer teológico como en nuestro quehacer de la Iglesia.
• Me pregunto si alguno tiene historias para compartir (positivas o negativas) sobre la relación ente anglos y latinos culturalmente o en la Iglesia.
• Cómo te hace sentir el cambiante “paisaje” de Norteamérica?
• Para los que no lo sepan, he estado trabajando (no tanto como quisiera) en un libro llamado “The Jesus Manifesto”. También tengo en mente un siguiente libro llamado “The Subversive Spirit”. Este sería una exploración contemporánea de pneumatología desde la perspectiva de un practicante. Y preferiría que este fuera algo que yo edite más que algo que yo escriba. Si están interesados en contribuir en este proyecto, háganmelo saber. En este quisiera explorar perspectivas cristianas globales, pentecostalismo, etc. con un gran énfasis en la praxis y en la comunidad. Mi esperanza es que este libro ayude a aliviar la falta de reflexiónes pneumatológicas dentro de la Iglesia Emergente en particular, pero dentro del contexto norteamericano en general.

Barbarian at the Gate

God speaks through the most interesting things. Or people, for that matter. I had an epiphany of sorts when I heard George Carlin talking about his career. He talked about how he had dropped out of school in the 9th grade and wanted to prove to people through his comedy that he was a thinking man. He didn’t want the audience to think: He wanted to do the thinking for them. He was driven to prove that he was someone…worthy.

I totally relate to this. I’m surrounded by educated people and often feel “less than” when I’m with them. When I sit with the team of people who bring the Sunday morning message (we call it the “pulpit team”), there is a trained teacher, an engineer, a lawyer, a pastoral studies major, a couple of computer geeks with masters degrees, and a couple of Art School grads. And me: A smattering of college credits ranging from electronics technician to history to philosophy to culinary arts. When I sit down with the other elders of my church, it’s the same thing. In my preaching, I often tackle deep theological issues because I want to show people that I am capable of understanding them. I want to be seen as a thinking man who has risen above his lack of education. I want to be respected for acquiring wisdom and knowledge through nontraditional sources. That’s why I read tons of books, own numerous reference books and research my sermon topics to the point of…I don’t know, death? I think that’s also why I tend to dig into obscure or fringe material and read a lot of the newest books: I want to bring something ‘different” to the table, something outside the norm. I want to be somebody.

Interestingly enough, I think that’s why a lot of educated people ‘go off the tracks’, particularly in disciplines that don’t have hard and fast rules like mathematics and accounting. When you are in a room full of people who are all educated in the same field and you feel the need to stand out, you either excel in the topic matter, or you head down the unbeaten and less trodden paths. How much ‘bad theology’ has been introduced into the church by people who simply want be ‘somebody’, to stand out? This isn’t the same as someone hijacking the church because of their own greed or to push their own personal agenda. I’m talking about iniquity: A character flaw, looking for approval from people instead of receiving it from God. For this, I repent.

With all that being said, I do think that there is an issue of having an ‘intelligencia’ in the church, an ‘old boys club’ that has it’s own secret language and rituals. They may even have a secret handshake that I’m not privy too. There is often a divide between the clergy and the layperson that is defined by education and culture and reinforced by the folks on both sides of the wall. You can’t preach or minister if you haven’t gone to college, and if you do preach or minister, I don’t need to take you seriously. In many ways, it reminds me of the dear sweat lady who informed me that she wasn’t going to believe I was ‘filled with the Holy Spirit’ until she heard me pray in tongues.

We are the body of Christ. We all have the same Spirit. We are all called to the ministry. Everyone has a role to play and we should not give up our place in the body just because we don’t have a piece of paper. At the same time, we shouldn’t exclude people because they don’t have that piece of paper. It’s a two way street. How often have people turned away from what God has called them to do because they don’t fit into the box that that the church has designed, giving up because they don’t have the credentials? Or, for that matter, how often has the church rejected someone because they don’t fit the man-made bill.

Even as I write this, I realize some people will dismiss my rant because I’m not a seminary trained theologian or pastor: Just a barbarian yelling at the gates or a jealous and wounded man crying out for the attention of his betters.

Or, perhaps, a rabble-rouser? Maybe a revolutionary? Someone who must be quieted down before they stir up the pot?

Either way, whether rejected or accepted by men, educated or not, the primary issue is receiving my acceptance from God, walking with Jesus, getting to know Him and falling deeper and deeper in love with Him, and letting that love manifest itself as an outpouring of genuine caring for my community. ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ and ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ You can’t possibly go wrong doing that, though you still might not get acceptance from man. In fact, if the Bible is right, you probably won’t.

Author Bio:: Dave is a husband, father, and wayward chef. He is a jack-of-all-trades and a master of some.

Mammon, you cruel bastard!

Ok, I’ve made a decision to remove any requests for donations from Jesus Manifesto. I realized that it might seem distasteful to some folks. Plus, it wasn’t working.

As annoying as those requests for donations may have seemed, I thought it was preferable to including advertising. Sure, I have those “ads” at the top of the site, but those aren’t really advertisements. They are promoting things that I think are worthwhile.

I’ve avoided putting ads on Jesus Manifesto because I believe we should resist consumerism and commercializing our gifts. At the same time, however, Jesus Manifesto has grown into this thing–a very good thing–that takes a lot more time than simply blogging ever did. Every week, I spend hours writing, editing, commenting, and responding to reader emails.

We have a very respectable reading community for a site that deals with issues that are outside of the religious mainstream. And every month, more readers become fans.

So, it seems that this site is only going to get more readers. I’ve thought about adding a second editor, to share the load, but before I put out a request, I want to explore the issue of funding.

I know that this is a touchy subject. There are a lot of purists that would think I’ve enslaved myself to mammon for even raising the question. But the reality is that my efforts provide a service to people. I have always offered it freely, and will continue to do so, but at some point I have to think about providing for my expanding family as well.

After I get some feedback on this, I’ll move on. I don’t want to keep struggling over the question of funding on this site anymore. It really isn’t a personal blog anymore. And I think sharing stuff like that is too personal.

So, please respond to the anonymous poll below. And then, if you are up for it, respond to the follow up question. I’m really interested in your feedback on this issue.

In general, do you think of blogging or webzines as legitimate ministry?

How do you think web editors should be compensated for their time?

How do we find the balance between appropriate means of financial requests and “selling-out?” Where is the line?

New Feature: Artículos en Español

I’ve added a new category: Artículos en Español. Some folks have offered to translate some articles into Spanish, so that Jesus Manifesto can be a place of welcome for native Spanish speakers. I know one measly category with some translated articles isn’t perfect, but it is a start.

Also, you may have noticed two little flags (British and Spanish) up at the top of the website. The feature isn’t working properly yet (keep checking back until it works), but it will allow you to instantly translate most of Jesus Manifesto into Spanish. You can toggle back and forth by clicking the flags. The translation is imperfect (relying upon Google’s translation engine), but it will help folks get the basic gist.

Eventually, I’d like to see Spanish-language articles submitted. Those will be added to the Espanol category and then, after being translated into English, be incorporated into the other categories (like praxis, doxis, aesthetics, etc.)

¡Viva la revolución!

Manuscrito revela revisiones en el Sermón del Monte

Temprano esta mañana, a la salida de una conferencia de prensa en Tel Aviv, una bomba fue arrojada sobre el mundo de la academia bíblica. De acuerdo con el Dr. Reese, quien es J. T. Holm Professor de estudios de Nuevo Testamento en la Universidad de Aberdeen, porciones “significativamente teológicas” del Evangelio de Mateo fueron editadas o insertadas por un “escriba con intenciones”.

El descubrimiento del Dr. Reese es un manuscrito “claramente del tardío primer siglo”. El manuscrito contiene porciones de Mateo, capítulos 2-7. En principio excitado por sus descubrimientos, el Dr. Reese se ha tornado preocupado por la forma en que este manuscrito ha desafiado sus profundas convicciones.

“El Sermón del Monte (contenido totalmente dentro del manuscrito) ha sido por largo tiempo mi pasaje favorito”, dice el Dr. Reese. “Ustedes entenderían mi ansiedad si les digo que este manuscrito trastorna la forma en que mucha gente comprende el Sermón del Monte, y, por ende, el mensaje de Jesús”.

El descubrimiento, hecho hace poco más de un año, ha sido mantenido en secreto hasta que el Dr. Reese hubiera discutido al respecto con importantes estudiosos de la Biblia de todo el mundo. Un equipo ecuménico de estudiosos ha afirmado casi unánimemente la edad y autenticidad del manuscrito.
El equipo de investigación afirma que “casi todas las diferencias son sutiles y serían consideradas no controversiales para la mayoría de la gente de fe”. No obstante, el problema grave es como el manuscrito presenta la información contenida en Mateo 5: 38-48. Aquí está la traducción del Dr Reese:

Oísteis que fue dicho: Ojo por ojo y diente por diente. Y yo añado: resistan a los malvados. A cualquiera que te hiera la mejilla derecha, tú hiere la suya también. Y al que quiera ponerte a pleito y quitarte la camisa, tú quítale su manto. A cualquiera que te obligue a caminar una milla, tu oblígale a caminar dos. Cualquiera que te ponga problema dale su merecido. Aléjate de los que quieran pedirte prestado.

Habéis oído: Ama a tu prójimo y odia a tu enemigo. Y yo os digo: Ama a tu prójimo y odia a tu enemigo, para que seáis hijos de vuestro Padre celestial. Él hace brillar el sol para el justo y manda lluvia al injusto. Si amas a aquellos que te odian, que recompensa recibirás? Sed justos, como vuestro Padre celestial es justo.

Se ha perdido el reto de Jesús de “poner la otra mejilla” y “caminar la milla extra”. En su lugar encontramos palabras inteligentes que parecen venir de “El Príncipe” de Maquiavelo.

Se han dado reacciones de distinto tipo a la conferencia de prensa. Varios líderes cristianos alrededor del mundo se han molestado; otros simplemente lo consideran una falsa alarma. Los más golpeados han sido los de las llamadas “Iglesias pacifistas”, quienes han considerado el Sermón del Monte como el centro de su entendimiento del Cristianismo. El Dr. William Poder, Presidente de la Universidad Menonita de Ohio, sugiere: “Para millones de cristianos, la paz es central en el mensaje del Evangelio. Este supuesto descubrimiento desafía dicho entendimiento. A qué nivel, no estoy seguro”.

Sorpresivamente, varios líderes cristianos se mantienen tranquilos al respecto. El Rev. Paul Gillmont, Director Nacional de “Unidad por un mundo mejor” cree que “aun si se demuestra que todas las enseñanzas de Cristo son una mentira, esto no desafiará nuestro llamado para que la gente de fe de todo el mundo se tome de las manos como una afirmación de amor mutuo”.

Pastor Lysa Alumbra, Obispo en la “Congregación unida para Cristo en América” opina: “Jesús es un símbolo cuyo poder viene de la forma en que Él refleja lo mejor de la humanidad. Si Jesús es mostrado como una suerte de guerrero o rufián, ya no será un poderoso símbolo de unidad y esperanza. Pero nuestra causa y nuestro mensaje continuarán”.

Mientras algunos líderes se resisten a la versión que se da en el manuscrito, otros, por el contrario, se sienten extrañamente alentados. El Dr. Owen Robertson, fundador de la coalición de la “Coalición Americana de la Familia” afirma: “Esto no cambia mi fe un ápice. Si acaso, el cambio en el lenguaje fortalece mi decisión por una América más fuerte”.

El Rev. Bill Mueller, presidente de la “Asociación Fundamentalista Bautista” opina: “La mayoría de mis colegas son muy políticamente correctos para decirlo, pero ahí voy: esta versión de las enseñanzas de Jesús tienen más sentido para mi. Por fin el Sermón del Monte nos muestra cómo es que debemos vivir en este mundo post-911”.

Translated by Sebastián Nieto

Ecological Armageddon & Repentance

In the last couple years the topic of global warming has skyrocketed from a fringe scientific debate to very mainstream, with everyday people, governments and businesses striving to find ways to ‘carbon-offset’ their living.

While a majority of the support goes to the Al Gore interpretation of the issue, there are a couple other perspectives:

1. There are those who support global cooling (a distinct minority)
2. There are also those who deny that changes in climate are anything more than that have occurred before. (a strong minority, but a minority nonetheless)
3. There are those who believe that global warming is causing a crisis that could change the face of the earth given enough time without actively changing the ecological footprint of the human species. (the majority)
4. Finally, there are those who say the global warming issue is far worse than the 3rd group believes, and that the only thing preventing all-out catastrophe is the fact that human pollution has created a global dimming issue which prevents spikes in warming across the planet. (a distinct minority)

I don’t particularly mind which group you place yourself in. What I do find fascinating and somewhat confusing though, is the fact that 3 of the four groups, constituting a majority, agree that there is a problem and that it could get severe; if not today, then in the future.

For such a cataclysmic belief, you would expect something more than purchasing carbon credits and turning off city lights for an hour. The Great Depression, World War II and the Cold War sparked far stronger measures impacting day-to-day living of American citizens yet for a concern that potentially threatens the very planet, a mild inconvenience seems to be the best effort that can be mustered.

I find a terribly strong parallel between this and the issue of repentance in the church. Repentance means to ‘turn around’, to confess, be purified and cease to do evil. The concern is an eternity of separation from God, and in addition to the threat there is a promise of eternal life with God and citizenship in God’s kingdom: the stick and the carrot, so to speak. Yet even with the teaser in front and the pain behind, moving forward tends to be an awkward, difficult step. This does not necessarily indict all believers, but it is too common to simply ignore, especially when it comes to issues such as evangelism and holy living.

So the question is, why? Is it human nature to be this stubborn when the problem is not immediately in our face or is difficult to see? Is it spiritual blindness? What means of prevention does your spiritual community use to help past this apathy?

I ask because, while I’m genuinely boggled at both issues, I am guilty of ambivalence in both areas and honestly am not sure where to start. I would love to hear what has worked for you.

Author Bio:: Jordan Peacock lives and works in Minnesota with his beautiful wife and daughter. When not playing with technology or music, he’s writing comic books and wrapping up a university education.

Why is “New Monasticism” controversial?

I understand why “new monasticism” SHOULD be controversial. It should be controversial because it challenges consumer comfort, encourages a more radical engagement with the margins, and in its prophetic voice for peace in a world filled with conflict.

But I don’t understand why it is has drawn ire from some conservative evangelicals for being some sort of legalistic reversal of the Reformation. Sure, the word “monasticism” is there. But mostly that is a word used to open one’s imagination to new possibilities, not call people to return to the Middle Ages (though I would certainly argue that there is much to be learned from Catholic tradition).

In a recent article by Ken Silva (that notorious critic of all-things-emergent), new monasticism has once again come under fire. And this time, much of criticism is leveled at me, and Missio Dei. I guess I should feel honored.

I may learn to regret this later, but I want to take some time to patiently respond to some of the more cutting challenges of Silva’s article.

…maybe you didn’t know that this neo-monastic “Protestant” evangelical return to the religious bondage of apostate Roman Catholicism has also positioned itself as another offshoot of the emerging church. Using its patented smorgasbord spiritual blender approach to the Christian faith—picking and choosing whatever they like from any movement/tradition which even remotely claims it was/is Christian—they then puree its doctrine until it takes on the fluid consistency necessary to reimagine [read: twist] it with the relativism of postmodernism.

I think it is a mistake to write-off the value of Catholic tradition. We protestants didn’t shoot out of the loins of God, fully formed. We came out of an earlier tradition: Catholicism. That isn’t to say that the Reformation wasn’t a good thing (though just how good a thing it was is open to discussion). I have zero desire to become a Catholic. I am happy to be a Mennonite. Though I feel like there is a lot to learn from the larger Body of Christ–Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, and Anabaptist (which I put into a separate category from Protestant).

Does this mean that I, along with other neo-monastics, are “picking and choosing” whatever I like and then making a relativistic smoothie with it? No. I’d like to think I’m being pretty darn theological about how I appropriate doctrine and practice from the various Christian traditions. And, at the core, I am doing so as an Anabaptist. Not as an individual religious consumer who shops through some sort of Spiritual K-mart.

I have come to see all of this as yet one more “subversive” Emerging Church rebellion against the authority of God’s Word. In fact, it really is a kind of “Christian” Marxism as R.J. Stevens earlier pointed out concerning Rob Bell in his insightful piece Rob Bell Preaches from Marx Gospel.

I can’t speak for Rob Bell, but the emerging church/new monasticism aren’t simply retreads of Marxism. I’ll be utterly transparent here: I think that Marx was right to critique capitalism. I don’t agree with this critique, nor his utilization of class-warfare. But he was right to be concerned and upset.

I’m also not sure that I, or any of my new monastic or emerging church friends, are interested in rebelling against the authority of God’s word. Instead of going into a lengthy defense of emerging hermeneutics, let me just ask this: Is it better to affirm the authority of the Bible in word, or in deed? I’m asking this because I think that many fundamentalists are quick to assert inerrancy and infallibility, but, oddly enough, are slow to be pacifists. In some ways, I think I am more of a fundamentalist.

So now with the political scene of the 60’s in mind as background, and considering that professors in Bible colleges today would have been shaping their ideologies in college themselves at that time, look at the posters a third of the way down on the right hand side of The Missio Dei Breviary. This website itself is an offshoot of a neo-monastic “community” called Missio Dei. And the founding member and “pastor” of this collection of self-styled mystic monks just happens to be Mark Van Steenwyk.

I’m assuming Silva is upset with the images I use for “Jesus Manifesto” and “Christarchy.” I am of course trying to utilize images that contemporary people would associate with subversion and revolution. Sure. But I am appropriating those images to point to a much deeper, much realer revolution than anyone could scheme up in the 60s. Am I wrong in using these images? Nope. I don’t think so. Jesus and Paul both utilized counter-Empire rhetoric (often subtly, it is true) to point to the deeper reality that is the Kingdom of God. (For more on this, read the works of Ched Myers, Richard Horsley, or John Howard Yoder). And if you want a double-dose of anti-imperial rhetoric, read the book of Revelation.

And then interestingly enough at the end of this month both Van Steenwyk and Shane Claiborne will be at The New Conspirators Conference along with emerging Abbess Karen Ward. You may also find it of interest that, while these emerging church people have trouble with “certitude” concerning what God’s Word says, apparently they are sure that it is the Lord Who is bringing neo-monastics together with these other Emergent Church revolutionaries and fellow resisters in “God’s conspiracy”…

Amen. And for the record, I believe in submission to scripture. That is a lot tougher and more important than “certitude” in relation to scripture.

Finally, at the end of this short clip of revisionist history about monasticism you’ll hear Van Steenwyk say that these new monastics “kind of embody the Gospel in a new way.” But in truth, a more fitting reimagining of Van Steenwyk’s last sentence would be that these neo-monastic Roman Catholic-embracing “Protestant” postevangelical monks actually embody a different gospel in a very old way.

The clip he refers to is still up on YouTube. I’m amazed at how people have used it to support conspiracies about Willow Creek being linked to a return to Catholicism. I’ve never met Bill Hybels. It wasn’t his decision to invite me to the Group Life Conference. I don’t like Willow Creek. It was awkward being there. And only a dozen people (or less) came to my session. And none of them seemed to fit with the whole vibe of the conference either.

Silva seems particular upset about the insinuation that we can learn anything from Catholics. God forbid that we embrace Roman Catholics. I mean, who do they think they ARE anyways–Christians or something? The monastic tradition is worth learning from. I’m not interested in returning to it. That would be a mistake. Just like it is a mistake for some evangelicals to want to return to 17th century reformation theology. The hope for our world is Jesus Christ–embodied in a people who live out the good news of redemption and reconciliation in a broken world. That is the conspiracy that God is calling us into. And to join that conspiracy is to engage in revolution against the principalities and powers that seek to keep us enslaved.

Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Earlier this morning, at a press conference outside of Tel Aviv, a bombshell was dropped on the world of Biblical scholarship. According to Dr. Owen Reese, who is J. T. Holm Professor of New Testament Studies at the University of Aberdeen, “theologically significant” portions of the Gospel of Matthew were either edited or inserted by an “over-eager scribe.”

Dr. Reese’s discovery is a manuscript that is “clearly from the late first century.” The manuscript contains portions of Matthew chapters 2-7. Initially, Dr. Reese was excited by his discovery. But that excitement turned to concern as the manuscript challenged his deeply-held convictions.

“The Sermon on the Mount (which is contained in its entirety in the manuscript) has long been my favorite passage,” says Dr. Reese. “You would understand my anxiety, then, if I tell you that this manuscript upsets the way many people understand the Sermon on the Mount, and, therefore, the message of Jesus.”

The discovery, made over a year ago, has been kept secret until Dr. Reese had time to confer with top biblical scholars from around the world. The ecumenical team of scholars has almost unanimously affirmed the age and authenticity of the manuscript.

The research team maintains that “most of the differences are subtle and would be deemed uncontroversial for most people of faith.” The problem, however, is in how this manuscript presents the information contained in Matthew 5:38-48. Here is Dr. Reese’s translation of the manuscript:

You have heard it said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ And I will add: resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, slap their cheek also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, take their cloak. If anyone forces you to go one mile, make them go two miles. Whoever troubles you, give them what they deserve. Turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

You have heard it said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ Indeed, love your neighbor and hate your enemy, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the good, and sends rain on the unrighteous. If you love those who hate you, what reward will you get? Be just, therefore, as your heavenly Father is just.

Gone is Jesus’ challenge to “turn the other cheek” or “go the extra mile” or “love your enemy.” In their place are words of wisdom that seem to come from Machiavelli’s the Prince.

Reactions to the press conference have been mixed. Many Christian leaders around the world are upset; some are convinced that this is simply a hoax. Hit hardest are the so-called “historic peace churches” who have placed the Sermon on the Mount at the center of their understanding of Christianity. Dr. William Yoder, President of Ohio Mennonite University, suggests: “For millions of Christians, peace is at the center of the Gospel. This supposed discovery challenges that understanding. To what extent, I’m not sure.”

Surprisingly, many Christian leaders remain calm about the discovery. Rev. Paul Gillmont, National Director of People for Unity in a Better World believes that “even if all of the teachings of Jesus are shown to be a lie, it will not challenge our call for people of faith everywhere to join hands in loving mutual affirmation.”

Pastor Lysa Alumbra, Bishop in the United Congregations of Christ in America agrees: “Jesus is a symbol whose power comes from the way in which he reflects the best of humanity. If Jesus is shown to be some sort of warmonger or ruffian, he will no longer be a powerful symbol for unity and hope. But our cause and our message will continue.”

While some Christian leaders stand firm, others seem strangely encouraged. Dr. Owen Robertson, founder of the American Family Coalition asserts, “this doesn’t change my faith one bit. If anything, the change in language strengthens my resolve for a strong America.”

Rev. Bill Mueller, president of the Fundamentalist Baptist Association, agrees: “Most folks are too politically correct to come out and say it, but I’m going there: this account of Jesus’ teachings makes more sense to me. Finally, the Sermon on the Mount can shed some light on how we are to live in our post-911 world.”

Editor’s Note: This article is a work of satire…don’t worry, there is no such manuscript. ;) 

living faithfully in a “throw-away” culture

America is a place where consumption is a top priority. Do you doubt me? Just think about it. There are few places a person can go in this great nation where he or she will not be bombarded by some form of advertising. And America sells it all. Food, cars, electronics, stuff, stuff and more stuff. Questions like “do I need this?” or “who made this?” aren’t necessarily discouraged, but they’re not encouraged either.

What if American Christians began asking these questions? Sure, there are small groups of people in the United States who are becoming concerned with issues of consumption, necessity and the mistreatment of workers; but on the whole, most of us live in a culture where just about everything is fair game to be bought, used without consequence, and then thrown away and forgotten about. And we do all of this without thought to the effects of our actions on the earth. I will be the first to admit that when a disaster occurs that involves people directly - hurricanes, earthquakes, etc. - Christians are willing to pack up and take a trip to provide relief to the hurting, the displaced, and the alone. However, it also appears to be the case that - as far as the environment is concerned - Americans are simply unconcerned and American Christians even less. We simply consume and we throw away and we do not ask questions.

Part of the issue may be that more and more people are migrating to the cities where agricultural concerns aren’t as visible. We seem to forget that the stuff we buy, buy, buy and then trash, trash, trash has to go somewhere. We do not seem to care that the more cars we have, the more damage we do to the environment. We seem not to be concerned about how much water we use (this is especially true in Durham, NC where I am located - we currently have about 60 days of water supply remaining). Now there are many who simply do not buy all this “climate change” “mumbo jumbo.” I am not one of those people. With Pope Benedict XVI, I believe that “We can’t simply do whatever we want with this earth that has been entrusted to us (YES Magazine.com).”

But my concern is even more specific than this. As a person who was raised in rural North Carolina and who went to college in a mostly rural, heavily agricultural community, I am a passionate supporter of buying organic and locally produced food and products and I am just as passionate about resisting corporate-driven agribusiness that is daily moving quickly toward the displacement of an entire cultural group in this country simply because they aren’t expedient enough, efficient enough, or willing enough to cooperate with practices that they know are harmful to the earth and which, in turn, make sustainable food production more and more difficult. But lest we think that the concerns of farmers and rural communities aren’t our concerns, Norman Wirzba has this to offer:

However much we might think of ourselves as post-agricultural beings or disembodied minds, the fact of the matter is that we are inextricably tied to the land through our bodies - we have to eat, drink and breathe - and so our culture must always be sympathetic to the responsibilities of agriculture. If we despise the latter, we are surely only one step away from despising the former too.

What does it mean to be radically faithful to Christ in a culture like this? How can Christians be faithful to Christ if we are so used to living in the way of the Empire that we don’t even know the difference between the two? Issues of environmental sustainability and community identity are not just the concerns of scientists and sociologists. Ordinary Christians are called to be stewards of the environment and cultivators of sustainable communities that model the way of Christ but it appears that we’re falling down on the job. I know that there are many Christians who take the challenges of consumerism and environmental sustainability seriously but it appears that more is going to be necessary. Therefore, this article could be thought of as a call to action:

A call for Christians everywhere to begin questioning their practices of consumption and waste. A call for creative action within the agricultural sphere to come up with genuine alternatives to corporate-driven agribusiness. And, ultimately, a call to prayer for all who understand that, regardless of where we live, we must eat, we must drink, and we must breathe and, therefore, we must pray for those who provide our sustenance. We must pray for discernment so that we may act. And we must pray for forgiveness for being so short-sighted that we do not always see the ways that our living contributes to the degradation of the earth of which we are all called to be responsible stewards.

What are your ideas? I want to hear your stories. Do you know folks who’ve successfully made their way out of the grip of agribusiness? Have you seen local communities and Churches take initiative towards the development of sustainable, community-oriented production of food? Please feel free to share your stories, your concerns and your prayers.

A Request for Technological Assistance

I need the help of someone with video skills (and a video camera).

I’ve been working on some projects that will help to broaden the Christarchy network (including the creation of an organizer’s manual). But folks still need a simply way to understand what Christarchy is and why they can benefit from either starting or being a part of a Christarchy group.

So my goal is to come up with a video intro to Christarchy (plus a shorter youtube version of that video). Please let me know if you (or someone you know) could help with this project. I really can’t pay anyone much, but would be able to pay a little if necessary.

« Previous Page — Next Page »