One for the road...

And then they all lived happily ever after... sometimes it does happen to christians too

I posted a few thoughts on PROTESTants and welcoming healthy critique of Christians from within and without, which in both cases referred to Mark Driscoll and the planned protest against him and his church (Mars Hill).  I am really delighted Mark and some of his outspoken crtics met and seemed to have had a very healthy dialogue resulting in the protest being called off.  If you'd like to read the positive accounts of the meeting from the people who were there then Helen has done an excellent job pulling together the relevant links here.

What I appreciated most about this conversation was:

1. the welcome of the critique and a recognition where people on all sides had used stronger than necessary language;
2. the apologies that flowed out of it;
3. that meeting together as fellow humans and listening to each other rather than blogging was so productive;
4. that people could disagree on theology and still treat each other with respect, dignity and recognise that others had valid points/feelings; and
5. as a christian community it is not about conformity but rather expressing diversity amongst a common tradition.

It reminded me again about the responsibility I have as a blogger and sent me back to read my recent post on healthy blog conversation.  It's something that I think I need to refer to more and more as the temptation is always there to apply a judgement to others that I am not willing to subject myself too and as a Christian the hardest thing to do is to show love and the easiest thing is to feel right!  So dear reader, if you see me getting all arrogant and puffy, let me know and help me come back to earth with a bump, please!

In the meantime, with advent beginning I am so glad that peace has broken out in this small corner of our world...

Hat tip to my critics: why as Christians I think we need to welcome/offer critique

I said in my post yesterday on the march on mars hill that I would look at the whole topic of critique/criticism further, so here are my musings...

Why the emerging church needs critique and so do I

Jason Clark posted a powerful critique of the emergent church, which as thinker and leader of emergent UK carries a lot of weight as well as common sense to it.  I think one of his strongest points for me was the need for us as Christians (of whatever stripe) but here in the context of emergent to both be open and respond to critique from within and without.  To me the most constructive form of critique is a conversation and the most destructive a rant of generalisations from a position of assumed superiority.

I’d like to reflect on a couple of recent examples of critique from with Christian circles (voices from within) and from outside (voices from without) and consider some possible responses in the face of these critiques.

Voices from within…critiquing christians and being critiqued by them

One of the recent storms in a tea cup that continues to rumble on in some parts is that of Mark Driscoll’s comments in the wake of the Ted Haggard affair and indeed some of his critics would say comments that he has been making for awhile now that seem critical of those who not share his complimentarian reading of the bible (to put his words into context it was a conversation that was primarily aimed at those who share his position rather which anyone is welcome to read if they so choose).

For a range of his critics you may wish to read the following posts/discussions in the comments: Andrew's commentary; Rose's open letter; coveration on the edge's critique on Mark and women and Blog against fundamentalism (who have chosen Mark as their first 'fundamentalist to march on...'

I find Mark’s response to his critics, entitled ‘thank you critics’ to a very encouraging one.  In his concluding paragraph he writes:

“Lastly, I want to thank my critics, especially the most vocal. They have helped me to understand that more than just pastors are following what I am saying. Subsequently, they are helping me to learn how to more clearly articulate what I am trying to communicate. In that way, they have been of great assistance to me as I seek to pastor most effectively for Jesus. I have waited some time to post this clarification because in times past I have gotten angry and responded with a tone that was defensive, prideful, and not helpful. I am learning that critics in some ways are also friends because there is often some truth in what they are pointing out. Subsequently, God is using my critics to teach me and is asking me to be willing to listen.”

I think Mark articulates a powerful sentiment that critics can be friends but that often are reaction is to feel got at rather than to listen.  I also find it interesting what the response of the critics are, some that I have read see Mark’s words as unacceptable as he did not apologise and want to continue to push for this outcome whereas others I think welcome the door opening on constructive dialogue and would rather be invited in then risk hammering on it in case it slams shut. 

I think this also highlights something about us as critics – are we being critical or are we instead asking someone to simply agree with our view instead?  As those who receive criticism are we teachable and able to appreciate the feedback loop from what people hear/perceive?  I think as critics we need to realise that our main role is to offer helpful encouragement and suggestions for change, tone, content that are offered up in the spirit of mutuality and love. 

In its most constructive sense that offers up the possibility of conversation where we do not agree but at least we engage rather than a conflict where no one is prepared to accept they might be wrong.  To give you an example from my own life, when Debs offers me some constructive criticism my first response is to say ‘well you do it too’ or ‘well you do this’ and turn it around – I am not prepared to change unless she changes/acknowledges the need for change.  Constructive criticism then I think should be a mutually vulnerable, humbling experience – if it is not and is just something to appease our hurt, to claim another notch on the think my way bedpost, to feel big correcting someone else’s faulty thinking whilst keeping our own protected – is conquest not criticism.

Constructiveor destructive voices?

Can we find a shared common ground? can we look and see how much we agree on rather than how much we differ?  Can we allow diverse voices even when we don’t agree with them?  Can we offer up encouragement and engagement?  Can we model our alternative views and celebrate them together?  Can we focus on ideas rather than personalities?  Can we look at our own faults and think I am likely to be wrong rather than I am likely to be right?  Ultimately as people who are meant to be marked by love can we love someone who we don’t agree with – can we include them rather than seek to exclude, draw them within rather than choose to push them without?  Can we model a generous orthodoxy of many colours, flavours or do we need to have one mono-coloured one?  As I think Nouwen suggested ‘a people who gather together and agree on everything is not a community – it is a clique.’

Voices from without - critique by the world

Jason has been doing a series of critiques under the title ‘is Christianity irredeemably…’ so far he has opened up with sexist and speciest and I hope he will also include homophobic and militaristic (any more suggestions??).  I’ve included the latter topics as I think that Jason has covered in his posts two of the biggest movements of the world in recent years – feminism and animal rights/environmentalism and the other 2 are the anti-war (Iraq and CND before that) movement and gay rights.  I think all four of these movements provide a welcome critique that Christians need to consider, particularly aspects of justice. 

God’s Spirit can speak to us from without but I also I think the Christians as a community of faith filled with the spirit from within and as people of the book can critique the culture of world  e.g. consumerism (e.g. here and here).

The points that I made about constructive criticism in the voices within section apply here – even more so with I think we as Christians needing to demonstrate that we have applied our own critique to ourselves and that we actively welcome the critique of the world – it’s not world bad/Christian good but spirit of God good and speaking to us from the world in ways that are consistent with the Word of God (Jesus) and the words of God that we have in the bible.

A case study – the critique by new atheism

As a recent example of one way of engaging in constructive criticism with the world I would like to highlight the critique being provided by ‘new atheism.’  As John explains in his post on new flavours of fundamentalism…

"Article author Gary Wolf says, "The New Atheists will not let us off the hook simply because we are not doctrinaire believers. They condemn not just belief in God but respect for belief in God. Religion is not only wrong; it's evil. Now that the battle has been joined, there's no excuse for shirking."

The most prominent evangelist of New Atheism is Richard Dawkins. In the article he says, "I'm quite keen on the politics of persuading people of the virtues of atheism." He continues elsewhere, "Highly intelligent people are mostly atheists."

Here are some Qs and my thoughts on my resposne...

Do I/we as Christians (and other faiths) reject this critique out of hand…?

Ok, this is just me but I'd like to hold my hand up and say that there have been a lot of evil done in the name of God by the people who claim to represent him - I don't think we can whitewash that out of our history so I for one hold up my hand and apologise - heck I've been a fundamentalist and bashed people around and taken bashings myself so i might not have done massive evil but I have certainly done a lot of things that were evil in miniature and also provoked reactions which could be considered evil.

I might well have missed the point back then, love was the velvet glove that I wrapped the iron bar of truth in to give people a good verbal bashing to - love my enemies oh yes in a kapow! sense...

Thanking, thinking and being challenged by the critics…?

I welcome this critique, instead of reacting against Mr Dawkins I should be thanking him. He rightly says is religion making the world a better place - ok what evidence have I got to contradict him? How is me following Christ allaying his concerns and not encouraging them? If anything his words make me start back at home base and make me look at all the blessing I want for myself and the very little blessing I want to give to anyone else - seriously i love the idea of it but do I actually deliver?

Finding common ground/perspective with my critics…?

I actually view Mr Dawkins as someone who actually I have a lot of common with - we are both people who have a position of faith - I can't prove ultimately there is a God; I need to make a step of faith, altho not a blind one I like to think. Likewise, Mr Dawkins cannot prove that there is no God and therefore chooses to make a step of faith albeit not a blind one (unless it’s a watchmaker) he likes to think.

So here we are both people of faith, both asking do our respective beliefs make the world a better place? In my case I admit I should be doing a lot more than just asking the question...

Questing after God…a response to critique

I think it is vital that criticism sends us not into a defensive reactionary spin or denial but on a quest to seek after God – as Jason has done in his irredeemable series to go back to the bible and the traditions of the church and seek to critique ourselves.  To open ourselves up to the possibility that we have got it wrong and to seek after God to inform and transform us, ultimately if we are to transform the world we need to be in the process of being transformed ourselves and one of the key shaping is our understanding and application of the teachings/interactions of the God of the bible and the work of his Spirit in our lives.   I think that our questing should therefore involve:

• confession – Scott McKnight posts here on a call for a confessional church and  I think it is a call that applies in response to critique – we need to listen to the voice of the Spirit from within and without, be honest rather than right, to admit where we have sinned in thought/word/action, to seek God and how his Kingdom is being shaped by this critique, rethink and if necessary move to where Jesus is rather than staying where we have been entrenched…
• authenticity: Jason has a recent great post here on this - to be authentic I think is not just transmitting/admitting our faults but also about telling the ongoing and enfolding story of our transforming as part of the community of God and the community of his people.  I think being authentic involves actions – its not enough to just having right ethics/morals but to actually embody/live those ethics/morals.  If I am honest that is not something I can do alone but in the community of God and his people I do not have to – I am a growing person who is being transformed – it is the story of my life and my experience and the more open I am, the more critique I have the more I can see where I need help to grow…

• growth: I think this is an organic not linear process, a lumpy process, a dirty/messy process, it involves achy knees, sore backs, long hours, mystery, prayer, hope, listening to advice and a dependence both within and without for the help I need – it is not just a solo experience, if it was I would still be trying to invent the wheel let alone the wheelbarrow…

Well that's me done... in the spirit of constructive criticism and conversation, what do you think?

To march or not to march or why PROTESTants like to protest...

People against fundamentalism are still planning their march against Seattle church leader Mark Driscoll, following what they consider his outspoken views on the role of women.  Whether you agree with Mark's complementarian theology, or like me you don't and hold an egalitarian postition, I think is a moot point at this moment.

I think there is a need for critique both from within and without and a vital need for the church to provide an outward critique of culture - something I'll post on tomorrrow (I'll use Mark as a good recent example and cover his response and a spectrum of his critics).

A hope for grace...

What I think is more important is the lack of grace that gets stirred up in me and the blog world, where critique is no longer constructive conversation but destructive criticism - of each other as much as Mark... I think it's a shame that whilst we focus on his flaws we ignore some of the profound grace that he demonstrates himself to women, for instance this post on a female porn star Jenna Jameson.  Here is one comment I posted on the people against fundamentalism site:

"Can someone please show me in this whole converation/protest the love, forgiveness, generousity and mercy that seem to be hallmarks of Christ (and of which I wished I had more of as a follower of him)…?

All I feel here is a hardening of my heart rather than a softening, a destructive solution, rather than a constructive one. We seem to be taking ourselves too seriously and God far less so.

We can shout complimentarian or equalitarian theology at each other, posture, claim we are right, that the other side is wrong, so may I make a practical solution in helping us respond?

May I suggest those of us who feel we are right, go and reflect on whether we need to lay down that right to be right, in this instant?

That those of us who still feel we are right, go and wonder whether we have ever been wrong and whether we are still wrong about anything, afterall if St Paul who we like to quote in these matters only saw it in a dark cloudy mirror do we feel that we now have the full clear right HD handle on the subject…

Those of us still left I suggest we consider Jesus words about judging others and decided whether we would like the same measure of judgement applied to our life? And when we’ve done reflecting on that consider whether we have ever said anything dumb or held a belief we look back now and shake our heads over? Ever flame anyone for that belief? Ever not do something you should have done because of that belief? Ever not apologised in either case? Anyone left with no sin can feel free to hurl the first stone, or lift the first placard or take the first step on the march…

What would happen if we as christians could learn to talk to each other I wonder? What would happen if we found a way past our pride and our hurt and our anger and to something more humble, more mutually submissive, more honest about what we don’t know rather than being so clear and vocal about the little we do?

There is a thing called karma which basically means for everything we do we get paid back, every action has a reaction - this protest is like a karma for Mark, he’s said things that have hurt some people, offended others, boy has he got this coming to him… funnily enough I think Jesus hits us with something new, something called grace, something called forgiveness, something he modelled as he was being executed in excruciating pain on the cross, with the words ‘Father forgive them, they know not what they do.’ Something that he taught us all who follow him to pray using these words (not as individuals but as a believing community who doesn’t always agree), maybe you if you are the praying kind you might want to join me…

“Our Father who is in heaven
hallowed be your name.
Your Kingdom come
Your will be done
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread
and forgive us our sin
as we forgive those who sin against us.
Lead us not into temptation
but deliver us from evil.
For yours is the Kingdom
the power
and the glory
For ever and ever.
Amen..."

Lol, ok see I can not stop protesting either ;).  What about you?

PMS - survival tips. Men, this film might just save your life as well as your relationship...

The National Board of Vineyard Churches USA embraces, educates and encourages women in ministry

 

The Vineyard USA Board (the Vineyard movement is the faith tradition I am part of) has been considering clarifying its policy on women in leadership for sometime.  As part of the process articles arguing for/against were invited for submission and available to read here.  Following an extensive process the Board has written this public letter to the movement with this positive position on the role of women, the key part of the letter states:

"...Having completed this process, the Board came together last week and unanimously agreed on the following position in regard to the trans-local ministry of women:

In response to the message of the kingdom, the leadership of the Vineyard movement will encourage, train, and empower women at all levels of leadership both local and translocal.

The movement as a whole welcomes the participation of women in leadership in all areas of ministry. We also recognize and understand that some Vineyard pastors have a different understanding of the scriptures. Each local church retains the right to make its own decisions regarding ordination and appointment of senior pastors.

There is no hidden message in this. It is our attempt to simply say that we are committed to empowering women wherever and whenever we believe the Lord has gifted them for leadership. The local church is still free to make its own decision regarding who they will empower for local church leadership. Nothing has changed on that. All Vineyard pastors will continue to respect pastors who have a different position on this matter..."

This is a positive and welcome clarifaction of the equality of women and the recognition/endorsement to follow God's  call for women to teach and lead, both locally, nationally and internationally. I also felt that the letter was generous, gracious and understanding towards those who have a different view and provided a way of continuing to work, learn and serve together.  This is reflected by what the letter goes on to say:

The outside(r) track...

In a spirit of modelling honest self criticsim Jason Clark asks is Christianity irrededemly sexist - it is a post that makes me want to apologise for all the harm and hurt that men have caused.  More than that thought it brings me to the point of how can we move on together, how can we live a life that is not only maked with repentence/rethinking but where we are  reconciled, outsiders reclaimed and remade by THE redeemer par excellence. 

"Who needs a doctor: the healthy or the sick? I'm here inviting outsiders, not insiders—an invitation to a changed life, changed inside and out."  Jesus

It strikes me that God is passionate about outsiders, he is the God of the misfits and marginalised.  It would seem that christianity is not so much getting onto the insider track but an invitation to follow Jesus on to the outsider track, to leave comfort zones, to extend love to the unlovely, to reach out to the unreachable and to realise that we are doing with Christ...    

A Jezebel spirit or just another case of ahabsenteeism...?

One of the posts that I have done as a guest blogger at Jason Clark's place was this one which explored dome thoughts as to why, generally, women out number men in churches.  This post has generated some great conversation, thoughts and reflections including this recent comment from Susan:

"I had the interesting fortune to sit through a sermon on the Jezebel spirit last Sunday. A humdinger that hung all the problems of feminisation of the church and likewise the world on the rise of a spirit of power to the woman because of lack of godly standing in men - a la Ahab. It has generated much discussion among me and a few friends. I would love to hear others thoughts on this one."

Susan and I have subsequently been discussing this issue and we've agreed to post our conversation here because we'd like to hear some more voices than just our own.  So please read on and post any comments/thoughts/questions/reflections that you have, we'd love to hear/learn/listen/grow with you...