"Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ." Ephesians 4:15Its hard to be part of a group as large as the Christian Church. Hard because being a Christian means that--whether or not you intend it--people can assume that all Christians believe the same things. Or that because they know a certain type of Christian, you must be of the same kind. Or other Christians assuming that your opinion must be theirs since, after all, they are right.
Its complicated, but I guess in some way its what identifying with a larger group is all about. Kind of. For while there are many similarities between the Christian Church and other organizations or groups of human beings, a major difference exists. You see, in the Church, it's not about what we believe or look like or act...not primarily. It's about whose body we are a part of. Upon whom our lives are founded. Who we all look to.
And that's Jesus Christ.
This fact--though important for us and foundational for Christian self-understanding--will be unlikely to changes the opinions of people who are used to looking at the Church in a certain way. Altering those perceptions calls for something more, definite actions...which is why Ephesians 4:15 remains important.
Its a hard verse to live, but one that I feel flows directly from Christ Himself--the embodiment of God in truth and love. Because of Him, we cannot simply utter the truth coldly and walk away, expecting it to fix everything. Nor can we blindly accept everything under the perceived aegis of "love" and allow all things good, bad, or ugly. We must do something more to fulfill Christ's call as Christians and point to Him.
Neither unyielding fundamentalists nor sloppy relativists need apply. Letting them run the show, taking all the interviews and doing all the "big" things will only lead to our identification with those with whom I'm convinced most of us do not agree.
What is needed rather is speakers of loving truth. True love. Honest care and a Christlike Spirit.
And what will that look like? Let me know what you think.
6 comments:
Hey Josh…I’ve been working through some of these same questions, specifically, how we, as the Church, should show love to those who have not yet experienced God’s grace and what roll condemning the sin in others may play in these interactions. Here are some thoughts I have on the subject. I don’t pretend to have any definitive answers which probably puts me closer to the sloppy relativists camp, but here goes anyway…
I guess it depends on what truth we feel we are called to speak or how we interpret caring about our neighbors. I think at the root of our human nature is the desire to legitimize our existence, our importance to the world around us. Unfortunately, the quickest way to become self-important or prove ourselves worthy of existence is to compare our “good” to other’s “bad”. This is usually a very simple exercise and serves to cause us to feel better about ourselves and our own “righteousness”. On Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs this would fall under status or esteem. I think we expend too much energy searching for and pointing out the faults, failures, and sin of others and far too little effort being honest about our own sin and the fact that there is no good in any of us. We are infinitely dependent on the imputed righteousness of God. We also have to realize that this goodness that is given to us by God is not something we receive as a result of any action we have taken or words we have said. Are we capable of believing enough to obtain salvation (God, help my unbelief)? If the atoning work of Christ on the cross redeemed all of humanity past, present, and future and this work of redemption not only is free, but has already been given to us, then we who are in relationship with God serve as signposts pointing to Life, to Love, to Christ. We point the way by fulfilling the greatest commandant we were given by Jesus which is to love God and each other. This Love is the Truth I believe we are called to speak. We are all sinners, we are all desperate, we are all empty, damaged, and beyond our own means to balance the scales. We know this not because someone lovingly pointed it out to us, but because the law exists to condemn us. The very understanding of the words “bad”, “good”, “right”, and “wrong” scream out our guilt. What more can we add to this. Our words cannot change another if they cannot first change us. As we point to pure Love, Jesus crucified, He will do and has already done what our words cannot. The Holy Spirit will reveal to us our nature and gently mold us into the image of Christ. God’s love can accomplish what our will power is unable to. This may occur instantaneously or over the course of a lifetime. I choose to speak of the Love God has for all of us. I choose to speak encouragement to the hopeless, to be excited about the love others are showing their neighbors, to declare the prison doors swung open and peace and joy available to all.
I believe that if one is hurting themselves or others, actions, including speaking the truth, must occur in a relational setting. If we do not love them, how will they believe us? If we are unwilling to be their friend how can they trust our words? If we have not shared a meal with them, how can we know them beyond our faulty perceptions? Our corporate and individual sin should be acknowledged and repented of, but maybe we should allow God to reveal and point to the sin in our lives as well as our neighbors.
Ziefle,
Perhaps another way to look at this question (rather, your series of questions) is to look for the word that best describes the function you're calling to your readers' attention. I think that word is compassion, or perhaps a combination of character and compassion.
A friend of mine sees compassion, exemplified in Christ's life, as a process: Christ (or a character in his parables) sees someone who needs; Christ (or the observing character) says something that identifies the someone's need (some say that Christ speaks to the situation); and Christ, because he is Christ (or the character, because he is like Christ), does something to meet that someone's need. Compassion, as a word, breaks into parts that suggest that a person with particular character recognizes another person's need and then acknowledges and acts on his own need (his drive or passion, parallel to the someone's need), to meet that someone's need.
Key to your statement/question and Mike's responses is the character of the observer, the witness who becomes speaker and agent: this person's character must be like Christ's in order for the see-say-do process to be one of compassion rather than judgment. This person's character must seek and cultivate understanding, even sympathy; and because it is like Christ rather than is Christ, that character (the person who has it) must recognize its limited authority.
Just a thought.
JS, your olde friend
Mike (and Sponsler as well, I suspect),
Thanks for your thoughts. I'm sensing that compassion and humility remain important parts in this equation...a modelling of Christ in Love and Truth but a recognition that our state is far from that perfect ideal.
I agree, but yet wonder if there is a point at which this compassion must segway into judgment. If some acts are too far gone to be treated softly.
Is there a line in life, or no? Hmmm.
Z-
You and I agree, it seems, about the distance between speaking ineffectively, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, speaking and acting productively. Your point about the extremes accounting for neither the range of christianities nor the body of Christ in a satisfactory way suggests that much of what the extremes say is simply speech, and not really Christ-like action.
Perhaps we can account for the distance by examining the character of the speaker: any good teacher knows that one person's simple judgment of another, in any relationship but especially in a relationship in which one person has something of value to offer to the other, is ineffective unless both the teacher and the student--both the observer and the someone in need--recognize the value of the judgment, and can act productively in relation to that judgment. Notice, for instance, that Christ tends to use labels that others have assigned to themselves, and to assign judgments usually in teachable moments: the final judgment comes only when the time to learn, choose, align, convert, or however you figure it, has passed.
I guess that my problem with your model--or with the direction in which your model and your response are pushing--is the way that you are using the word judgment. The body of Christ, it seems, and the bride of Christ, likewise, are biblical and traditional figures that suggest of the church that it is something that, like the rest of humankind, is to be judged, not to be the judge.
Although we need to think critically and carefully about issues like those to which you allude, to engage contemporary discourse with intelligence and integrity, and to speak to situations intensely, we do not need to pretend to function as judges of the people involved in those situations--regardless of whether those people are "powerful witnesses" or "people who clearly (and loudly) have it wrong" in our opinions. Like Christ, we need to be willing to address others as people who have needs; to meet with them because of our genuine concerns for them; to ask questions of them and really listen to their responses; and to take the time to understand their theories and positions and why these people have these theories and opinions--before we attempt to convince those who hold such theories and positions that they may be wrong. To imitate Christ in these ways, without pretending to be the Christ, is to maintain humility, sincerity, and authenticity; to be compassionate; and to make possible a productive response to the need.
The purpose of entering public discourse, it seems to me, is to contribute to the discussion and, through the discussion, to help others think, learn, feel, understand, etc. The purpose of entering public discourse, I'm guessing, should not be to judge.
I'm responding here to your question "what would it look like?" by suggesting that Christian speakers should see themselves as teachers who are interested in the learning of all who are involved in the conversation: the teachers (who are students) and the students (who are teachers). There's much to say about this.
One last thing: Z, you know me. Please protect my anonymity. Thanks.
JS
I don't know what a sloppy relativist is, so I might be one. If so, apologies.
My thoughts are these:
1. Dialogue such as this is a good way to "point to Him."
2. If "there is a point at which this compassion must [segue] into judgment, how would we make sure we know all there is to know in order to make a Christ-like judgment?
3. Having judged, what then? Is it ours to mete out God-like justice?
4. God's idea of time (in which justice may be done) is not ours.
Josh,
I think we may need to refine our definition of judgment and who is being judged in order to more clearly see our part in it. Helping a friend see the negative consequences of his actions is much different than communicating via words or deeds that a particular action, belief system, or lifestyle disqualifies or prevents an individual or entire people group from receiving Gods Love thus preventing relationship with Him. For actions that separate us from relationship with God or our community (others) I believe there is a place for correction and intervention. In love, we should point out harmful actions and patterns and attempt to be light to others so that we may help guide them back into right relationship with themselves, others, and God. There are indeed consequences to actions which cannot be avoided or ignored, but we must still forgive. An additional consequence of unrepented sin against others may place us out of relationship with our community and cause us to be out of fellowship with our local church, but the church must still forgive and seek reconciliation. We should also continually test our motivation and heart in this process. What do we hope to accomplish? What is the desired outcome? If it is any less than reconciliation and restoration, we need to rethink our mandate. I also believe that our interactions with people not in relationship with Christ should differ than those we call our brothers and sisters. Jesus modeled these relationships for us in the Gospels. He was a friend to sinners, frequently dining and spending time with them. He was teacher and mentor to the twelve, but frequently judged and rebuked those with religious authority who were self-righteous and misrepresented Him and the Scriptures thus misleading others. I think this may be a good pattern for us to follow. We need to be very careful in criticizing those Christian leaders with which we disagree. Doctrinal differences are not a misrepresentation of Christ, but only differences of opinion.
The problem in drawing a “line” is that each individual may define a “line” differently. Some may believe it a sin to drink moderately, to dance, to read Harry Potter, but others may not. Who’s right? Does it even matter as we each need to follow our own consciences on these matters. Is gluttony a greater sin than gossip? Does God’s grace cover my adultery, but not my brother’s sexual orientation? To pretend that my interpretation of goodness and morality should apply to all is very self-righteous. It often is a long battle for ones sin to be revealed and overcome. Often sin is not overcome and grace is all we have. Does unconquered sin prevent us from being in relationship with God if we are truly seeking to live lives pleasing to God? What if we mean well, but aren’t trying as hard as we could? To be guilty of one small part of the law is to be guilty of all of it. I believe the truth is that we are all on the wrong side of that line. We are not in relationship with God because we are good and crossed over to the “right” side of the line, but because of the great redemptive work accomplished by Christ’s death and resurrection we have become righteous because of His righteousness which He imputed to us. What is more pleasing to God, spending all our energies trying really, really hard to be good or to spend our lives pointing to Jesus and responding to His love? What advances the Kingdom of God more, a lifetime of church attendance or a glass of water given in the name of Jesus to a thirsty child? I’m trying to learn to spend more time looking upwards toward God and others rather than downwards at my feet looking for lines and spending all my energy trying not to cross them.
Post a Comment