Colossians Remixed 7

Posted on

This post is part of my ongoing response to the questions I posted as part of this month’s book discussion on Colossians Remixed by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat over at the Emerging Women blog. (read my other responses – here).

Question #7 –

If Christians are not to be at home in an empire characterized by sexual sin, greed, and violence, the authors ask what should the Kingdom look like? They proposed a life lived where the peace of the victim of an empire is spread, where community is lived, gratitude is practiced, and worship proclaims that Christ not Caesar is Lord of our lives. Practical suggestions the authors give include – pledging our allegiance to Christ not to the empire; investing as much each year in the hurtings present needs as we do in our future retirement; paying attention to where our food comes from and what’s in it; setting up food co-ops where you can get food produced as locally as possible, in environmentally responsible ways, and that seeks to do justice to the producer of the food; be ecologically responsible by reducing our use of cars and start walking. biking, or using (or lobbying for) public transit; be good stewards of the ecosystem and stop dumping diapers (for babies or women) into the landfills (and hence streams and rivers). How do you react to those suggestions? What else could you add?

I like all of their suggestions. I care about those things. And yet I don’t always live that out. I’ve blogged on that issue before (here). Sometimes, I don’t know what exactly to do to change things. If I care about stuff like this and still have issues living it out, how can I ever hope to encourage others to live justly?

Plus most of the time I just really don’t know what to say. When my friends and family start going off on things that really contradict my values and understanding of the Kingdom I generally just don’t say anything. I’m torn. I want to share what I am passionate about, but I don’t want to do it in an argumentative way or in a way that invalidates the things they are passionate about. So I don’t say anything and let them assume I completely agree with them.

For example. Easter. We didn’t do the whole egg thing this year. I didn’t want to stuff plastic eggs with cheap crap made in Asian sweat shops nor with unhealthy unneeded candy made by child slaves. I also didn’t want to waste food by dying eggs nor spend money on cheap eggs that support environmentally and ethically harmfully practices. But all my friends were talking about those things. Who has the best price on eggs? On candy? When can we get together to dye eggs? I don’t know what to do in those situations. Do I explain my choices, do I question their choices, and do I endure the “OMG what a religious freak who won’t let her child enjoy life” accusations? (which I of course said about the families who banned the Easter bunny because it detracts from the real meaning of Easter. And shudder that I am coming to the same lifestyle conclusions as the fundamentalists but for completely different reasons)

So this isn’t really a real answer here. Just to say that I find it really easy to write about stuff like this on my blog, but find it a lot harder to consistently put it into practice or to share it with the people I interact with everyday.

Read more

Colossians Remixed 6

Posted on

This post is part of my ongoing response to the questions I posted as part of this month’s book discussion on Colossians Remixed by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat over at the Emerging Women blog. (read my other responses – here).

Question #6 –

What is your reaction to this quote? “Does the child who sits in front of a television set for three to four hours a day, shops at the mall with her parents, goes to school and recites the Pledge of allegiance, plays computer games, listens to her president encouraging everyone to go out shopping in order to defeat terrorism, wears clothes from the Gap, and plays with the toys created out of the imagination of Disney and Hollywood, ever actually choose the American way of life? … Was there a moment of conversion in her life when the American dream became her dream? No. She imbibed the monocultural consumerist dream in the fast food she ate, the polluted air she breathed and the visual culture she inhabited. And so she was converted, made into a cult member, before she knew what was happening.” (p171).

So I read this quote the other evening. Emma was sitting on her Elmo chair wearing her “Future Jedi Knight” t-shirt and watching Dora the Explorer. We had spent the afternoon at playgroup at the mall. Oh, and we had gone through a fast food drive through for lunch on the way to the mall. My initial response – “oh crap, I’m a horrible mother/person. I need to feel guilty.”

But I don’t. Well, not completely.

I’m a fan of moderation. As I’ve mentioned recently in other posts, I don’t think most (if any) things are evil in and of themselves. Kinda Shakespearean “there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so” sort of thing. So while I think there are serious things wrong with the world we live in, I don’t see the best response to be withdraw from that world.

For example I see the abuse of alcohol as a bad thing, but I don’t think that means that all people should always avoid alcohol. I see being consumed by greed and the desire to acquire stuff as well as an ignorance of the global implications of our purchases as bad things, but I don’t think it means that all shopping must end. I see a world where children lose the ability to be imaginative and creative as a bad thing, but don’t think imaginative stories/movies (even if they have an agenda) should be condemned and avoided. (As for the fast food thing. That’s just pretty much evil and harmful to our bodies, our families, and the environment. I have no excuse there).

I’m a fan of engagement over withdraw. To explore with my child the world around her. To not mindlessly accept and consume, not reject for the sake of rejection. To teach her to value people over stuff. To encourage her imagination. Will this affect our habits? – it should if we are in any way different from the empire around us. Just being aware that our shopping habits affects families and children around the world changes a lot.

And I see nothing wrong with enjoying life. I enjoy a well cooked meal. I enjoy a good glass of wine. I enjoy a good movie or book or TV show. I try not to be consumed by such things (although there are times in my life when I’ve leaned in that direction, especially when it comes to certain fiction genres. And please no LOST comments…). I see no problem with Emma enjoying Dora, or the children’s museum, or the Zoo. But if our enjoyment comes at the expense of others (dark chocolate made by trafficked children…) then there are issues.

Its the whole in but not of the world thing. At this point I see it as possible to live in this world counterculturally. That doesn’t mean a rejection of all that the world has to offer, just a need to engage thoughtfully with it and to constantly be self aware.

All that said, there is still some guilt. I know there are still things I need to change. Areas of my life where I knowing support the empire over Christ. I want to get past the guilt and find positive ways to live. It’s a fine balance between guilt induced through education and awareness and the healthy changes they can effect. But I’m trying to be aware. To not let my daughter be initiated mindlessly into the cult. To not promote values that I disagree with just because they are easy or expected. And to encourage her to subvert the empire when it needs correction. Do I have a clue most of the time as to what I am doing? No, but I’m going to keep on doing it.

Read more

Colossians Remixed 5

Posted on

This post is part of my ongoing response to the questions I posted as part of this month’s book discussion on Colossians Remixed by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat over at the Emerging Women blog. (read my other responses – here).

Question #5 –

In Colossians 3:5-17 Paul tells us to put to death the things of our earthly nature (sexual immorality, greed). The authors write, “Why end a list of sexual sins with an economic sin? Because sexual sin is fundamentally a matter of covetousness, an insatiable, self-gratifying greed that has the control and consumption of the other person as its ultimate desire” (p160) and “In our culture, the unrestrained economic greed of global market capitalism pimps sexual promiscuity along with its entertainment products, communications systems, automobiles and running shoes. You see, if the empire is all about economic growth driven by a lifestyle of consumption, then all of life becomes a matter of consumption – including our sexual life. … There is no point in getting all morally absolute about sexual promiscuity if Christians are screwing around with the same consumeristic way of life as everyone else. This text gives us the language to identify what is going on here for what it is: idolatry.” (p162). How do you see sexual immorality as being greed and idolatry? What is the value of the alternatives?

I’ve always been uneasy with views of sex that paint it as evil in and of itself. The views that dichotomize body and soul. That disparage the physical world as evil. That are ashamed of our bodies.

Like it or not or intended or not those are the views that dominate the church’s approach to sex. There is something shameful about our bodies, they are finite, they wear down, they tempt us and are therefore evil. In a culture mesmerized with Platonic conceptions of reality the heresy of dualism finds an easy hold. Sex is evil because it is sex.

Christian women are taught to be ashamed of their bodies. To hide away their physical selves lest they “cause” their brother to stumble. Sex is the quintessential sin to be avoid at all costs. Do not think about it. Do not explore or attempt to understand your physical self. You will be ruined as a person for life if you slip up here. Take pride that you have stripped yourself bare of any desire to partake of that tainted act. But from your wedding night onward you had better be prepared to enjoy sex – creatively and proactively or else you will cause your husband to sin from neglect…

I remember the first time I asked (really asked) “why is sex outside of marriage wrong?” The answers I was given (because it is for pleasure and not procreation and because God says so) didn’t cut it for me. And I discovered that was a question you just didn’t ask. Ever. I wanted to affirm the conclusions but wanted better reasons and I just couldn’t seem to find them.

That’s why I liked the the take presented here. It explores the deeper reasons. It doesn’t turn sin into a concrete object or action that is performed, but sees it as an attitude of the heart that gets lived out in various ways. It allows for sex and the body to be celebrated in and of themselves, but still provides caution and care in their expression. And it gets past the hangup of seeing sexual sins as the only moral issue out there.

Idolatry is whatever causes us to turn away from the image of the invisible God and be consumed with other images. When the structures and mandates of empire usurp our worship. When the materialism of the marketplace captures our imagination. When other image-bearers become commodities for us to use. Then we have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator.

Read more

Colossians Remixed 4

Posted on

This post is part of my ongoing response to the questions I posted as part of this month’s book discussion on Colossians Remixed by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat over at the Emerging Women blog. (read my other responses – here).

Question #4 –

4. But wait a minute you cry! Aren’t Christians supposed to subject ourselves to the governing authorities and all that? The authors respond – “Rather than read [Romans 13] as providing carte blanche legitimation for any regime, regardless of how idolatrous and oppressive it might be, we suggest that Paul is actually limiting the authority of the state. The state is a servant of God for our good. it has no legitimacy or authority in and of itself, apart from subjection to the rule of God. and when the state clearly abrogates its responsibility to do good, when it acts against the will of God, then the Christian community has a responsibility to call it back to its rightful duty and even to engage in civil disobedience (see Acts 12:6-23). The state has no authority to do evil”. (p185)

I like the balance created here.

I have often heard the “subject yourself to the governing authorities” used as that sort of carte blanche. It is a line used to silence all opposition and dissent. Question the war, the Patriot Act, or No Child Left Behind and you are treated as if you are questioning the existence of God. And labeled a liberal (its hard to tell which is worse)

Then from another camp if I merely attempt to say that the government is in a good position to help make the world a better place and I’m told that I look to the government for my salvation. And that I’m a liberal.

So I like this response. That government thing – it’s there because of God. You know “for by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.” The government is just one more thing that can serve God for his glory. Can it be corrupted by power and swayed by greed? Of course and we have the empires to prove it.

But the responses that say “well even if it is doing God’s work we won’t let it or support it” and those that say “well even if it’s doing evil, we have to support it” just don’t make sense to me. To me the government can be used as a tool to advance God’s kingdom (and I so don’t mean this in a theocratic dictatorship sort of way) or it should be called out when it engages in practices contrary to kingdom values.

So to pledge one’s allegiance to the government (or to a party within that government) instead of God (or as it is subtly twisted – in the name of God) misses the point. Our purpose is to serve God and spread God’s love. If the government is on board with that great. If it is working against that mission, then it needs correction.

For another interesting take on this check out this post over at Theolog.

Read more

Subverting the Empire Today

Posted on

In my reflections on Colossians, I would be remiss to ignore the news coming out of Turkey this week. Apparently, knife-wielding attackers slit the throats of three people at a Christian publishing house in conservative eastern Turkey yesterday. The Zirve publishing house had previously been the target of nationalist protests for allegedly distributing Bibles and proselytising.
Read the full story here.

Followers of the way of Christ trying to subvert the empire in Turkey are persecuted by those who oppose them. Sounds strangely familiar. Its all good to talk about how the letter to the Colossians encouraged the believers to follow a different way of life than that promoted by Rome and hint at the danger of spreading that message, but how does one respond to the same thing today?

The first thing that comes to mind is to wonder if it is the same thing. I don’t know much at all about this publishing house, what their intentions are, and how exactly they live out their faith. I’ve known enough missionaries to closed countries to not be naive about some of the manipulative and underhand ways they work for converts. The process often has little to do with making the world a better place or spreading Kingdom values, and everything about getting notches on their belts and getting butts into heaven. And I’ve also known some amazing people who care about spreading God’s love everywhere who are in the same places. It is interesting to note that it is often the churches that are most vocal about supporting the American government (the whole we have to submit to governing authorities thing) that are the most insistent about subverting other governments by illegally sending missionaries into closed countries (and yes, I know that officially Turkey is secular, officially). What was this group doing? Were they just trying to impose some Western conception of Christianity onto a foreign culture (exchanging empire for empire)? Were they there to persuade others that Islam is absolutely wrong and Christianity absolutely right? Were they there to promote freedom of knowledge and access to the Bible to those who desired it?

I don’t know what to think. I am pained by the hatred of the terror and violence. But the history of Christianity is seeped in the tradition of imposing one version of empire onto another’s. I am supportive of tolerance and respect for other cultures, but then wonder how to spread the hope of Christ in a way that continues to be loving and respectful. Subversion and tolerance – is there a balance? Should there be?

Read more

Virginia

Posted on

The mass killing at Virginia Tech yesterday is on everyone’s minds. It is hard to understand the why, but I found some of the information released in today’s news to be disturbing –

The suspected gunman in the Virginia Tech shooting rampage, Cho Seung-Hui, was a troubled 23-year-old senior from South Korea who investigators believe left an invective-filled note in his dorm room, sources say. …
A note believed to have been written by Cho was found in his dorm room that railed against “rich kids,” “debauchery” and “deceitful charlatans” on campus….
Timothy Johnson, a student from Annandale, Va., said people would say hello to Cho in passing, but nobody knew him well.
“People are pretty upset,” Johnson said. “He’s a monster; he can’t be normal. I can’t believe I said ‘hi’ to him in the hall and then he killed all those people.”

Two things struck me. How Cho’s suppossed “reasons” for the attack parallel some of the reasons given for 9/11. And then the response of the fellow student. Just the assumption that to be nice to someone who is abnormal or even evil is so out of the question.

I in no way want to justify Cho’s actions or blame the victim’s for his choices. I know we don’t know much about Cho and what other issues he was dealing with. But I have to wonder at how people like him are pushed to the edge. When normal people won’t interact with the guy who’s a bit off, when one sees valid concerns in the structure of society and feels powerless to have a voice against them – what then are constructive ways to work for change?

I know I get frustrated by how the normal response to me by my friends is just to roll their eyes or make fun of me when I go off on one of my liberal hippie jesusy rants. And on the national scale when countries don’t change the way we want them to, we go on killing sprees with bombs. I guess that’s what my rambling is leading to – trying to figure out how to change the world effectively without resorting to violence or despair. That’s what’s running through my head as I reflect in shock on the recent events.

Read more

Twisted Sexist Crap

Posted on

This is so sick and wrong I hardly know what to say. Apparently Quentin Tarantino’s character from the new Grindhouse movie Planet Terror, Rapist Number One, is being made into a toy to be sold at Toys R Us stores across the country. In what sick universe is it okay to celebrate a rapist (even if it is Tarantino) by making him into a toy!

So there are rumors that the Toys R’ Us thing is just a publicity stunt to help save a failing movie. So what. Others defend Tarantino as a brilliant filmmaker. I could really care less. I’m not a fan and there is nothing that could ever justify making a rapist doll.

What? Should moms be trying to teach their daughters early that since 1 in 4 of them will be sexually assaulted they need to just get used to it? “Here sweetie is Rapist #1 to play with your Barbies and Bratz. And just fyi its their fault for wearing miniskirts if he’s forced to rape them.”

Okay, so I know that this isn’t meant for children. But its no worse than having it sit on the shelves of Hot Topic shopping loner teenage boys who fancy themselves misunderstood artists. Perhaps we wouldn’t have to teach our daughters to fear men if the boys were actually taught to respect women – wouldn’t that be a novel idea…

Trivializing violence against women in this way just allows for the problems to continue. People freak out at the term “feminist” as if its a bad thing. If you call yourself a feminist you get dismissed by most levels of society. But it’s apparently perfectly fine to to see rape as entertainment or at least call this a harmless joke (and get pissed off that all the feminists are so enraged by it).

And some people wonder why I talk about stuff like this so much. Twisted crap like this is out there – sexism is still the norm for a lot of people. And I will continue to do everything in my power to put an end to it.

Read more

Thinking Blogger

Posted on

Gaston: “Lefou, I’ve been thinking”.
Lefou: “A dangerous pastime.”
Gaston: “I know.”
– Beauty and the Beast

So in our house whenever we start a sentence with “I’ve been thinking,” it usually gets the response of singing those Beauty and the Beast lines. (and yes, that started in the pre-toddler days). So apparently Jamie gave me a Thinking Blogger Award. I’ve seen this around on some of my favorite blogs already and am honored to have my emerging/mommy/rant blog listed. It has been fun to trace the whole thing to it’s source (rare for memes). Anyway – thanks for the award and now I get to pass it on to five blogs that make me think.

Emerging Pensees (so what if its my husband’s blog, he says some good stuff every now and then 🙂 )
A Church for Starving Artists
Dylan’s Lectionary Blog
Rose Madrid-Swetman
Faithfully Liberal (yes I know its a group blog…)

Your mission (if you are one of the tagged), should you choose to accept it, is to pay it forward as well … the rules are simple and they are three:

1. If, and only if, you get tagged, write a post with links to 5 blogs that make you think
2. Link to this post so that people can easily find the exact origin of the meme.
3. Optional: Proudly display the ‘Thinking Blogger Award’ (here is the gold version and the silver to better meet your needs for blog design).

And enjoy the blogs……

Read more

Colossians Remixed 3

Posted on

This post is part of my ongoing response to the questions I posted as part of this month’s book discussion on Colossians Remixed by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat over at the Emerging Women blog. (read my other responses – here).

Question #3 –

Poetry of subversion. The authors explore how the hymn presented in Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn of subversion of Empire. It takes the language of Empire and proclaims the supremacy of Christ over Caesar – radical, subversive, dangerous. They then contribute a “targum” (an extended translation and expansion that reads our world through the eyes of the text) of this passage. You can read it on p.85 or here. (and a short article on the point they are making here). What is your reaction to the poem? Does this imagination of an alternative to empire make sense?

I love that poem/hymn. We do live in a culture of images vying for our attention, or allegiance, our time and our money. The numbers vary, but it is thought that an individual is generally exposed to around 600 advertisements per day. We pay companies for the right to wear their name brand on our chest or butts.

I watch TV, I buy stuff, I surf the web (a lot). I don’t see any of that stuff as evil in and of itself. In fact most of that stuff has and can be used for good. I see the value in patronage and support and sponsorship. Issues arise though when said images and economic structures dominate our consciousness. When we allow the greed promoted by our economic system to let us forget that Christ is the image we should focus on. As Walsh writes, “this means that the ideology of economic growth is not Lord over our lives. We are not subservient to the imperatives of consumerism, ecological despoliation, technological innovation, and seeking our own self-interested security because we are subjects of another kingdom. We are committed to submitting our lives – including our economic aspirations, consumer habits, ecological practice, political involvement – to the one in whom, through whom and for whom all things are created.”

So this is about being image bearers for Christ rather than for someone else. I personally don’t see this as a polemic against style but an attitude encouragement. And neither is the point to eschew name brands in favor of whatever the cheap brand is. The allure of Walmart is just as seductive as that of Abercrombie – when both challenge the supremacy of Christ’s love by using his children in sweatshops our patronage of either demonstrates our allegiance to an economic system over Christ.

I don’t do a very good job at this. I live in suburbia. So many days I really don’t stop to think if my economic purchases put Christ first. Scratch that, most days it is only about my needs and wants. The poem proclaims –
the church reimagines the world
in the image of the invisible God

I’m trying to figure that out. To see the good in stuff. To not be a slave to systems of greed. To think about if my purchases are just. To be an image bearer.

Read more

Global Warming and Terrorism

Posted on

So I wonder how this report will affect the conservatives’ response to global warming –

WASHINGTON (AP) — Global warming poses a “serious threat to America’s national security” and the U.S. likely will be dragged into fights over water and other shortages, top retired military leaders warn in a new report.

The report says that in the next 30 to 40 years there will be wars over water, increased hunger instability from worsening disease and rising sea levels and global warming-induced refugees. “The chaos that results can be an incubator of civil strife, genocide and the growth of terrorism,” the 35-page report predicts.

Read the full story here

Read more