seethrough

we always like to think that “we” are better.  even when we are trying to be humble.   our “humility” is “better” than those we deem to be arrogant or misguided.

“better” is a judgment that is motivate by the our common need to compare.

how can we overcome this addiction to comparison?

I have spent most of my life within one religious tradition.  at one point i considered changing, but in the end stayed and been fairly stable since then about where home was.  But a friend was recently reflecting her experience of having been in “charismatic” churches and also in “mainline” churches and her observation was that we are all the same: in this sense, that we are all comparing ourselves with the others - so as to better describe our positions.  It seems - she said - that every church community needs to be against something in order to define itself - it’s position and character.

At first I was surprised.  I thought that it was teh Charismatics (THEM) who broke away from us over theological issues like baptism and speaking in tongues.  I thought that it was THEY who were “against” us.   But her surprising observation was that within a “mainline” church she had experience as much negative comparison as in any other church she had been in.  Her conclusion: we all define ourselves by what we are against.

And then the challenge:  she asked, why can’t we define ourselves more often by what we are for?  What are we hoping for?  What are we working for?  What are we longing for?

is this the answer to my earlier question - how can  we overcome our addiction to comparison?  Comparisons are a part of our daily life - comparing and contrasting red with orange, and darker with lighter.  Comparison isn’t in-and-of-itself a bad thing.  But how quickly it degenerates into negatice comparisons that form value judgements about how pretty someone is, how slim someone is, how clever a person is…

And who are we comparing with?  usually our negative comparisons are with ourselves - our body, our party, our church, our position etc… - so as to reaffirm our confidence.

We make a world of “them” and “us”.

We must break this habit.  And we must spend as much of our focus and energy on what we are FOR …

FOR God’s sake.

at my home group tonight we were discussing a metaphor from Brian McClaren’s book Everything Must Change.

He invites us to imagine someone trying to complete a puzzle using the picture on the lid of the puzzle box.  Except that the box lid somehow got swapped with another puzzle.  Doing the puzzle becomes increasingly frustrating because the pieces don’t seem to correspond with the picture and vice versa.  Eventually, the person either gives up or they decide to “go” with the box-lid picture, attempting to force the pieces to produce the picture on the box.  Or the person stops using the picture and focuses on the pieces themselves allowing the picture to emerge.

The metaphor is likened to our lives - and the journey of spirituality - to doing a puzzle.  The pieces are our lives, which are real and do reflect some intention and purpose, but this is not entirely clear to us yet.  We may have found a few pieces that seem to go together and so these fragments become our starting place.  The picture we have been given to use as a guide is the version of the Christian religion that passed down to us.  It is a narrow understanding of Jesus that reduces his life and teaching and his death on the cross to a divine plan to get us all into heaven.  This “evacuation” theology focuses almost entirely on saving souls for a life hereafter.  But it seems to have little to say to our present lives and the reality of suffering, the questions we wrestle with, and the purpose of this life.  This view of Christianity has become the “whole truth” and any suggestions that there is more to Jesus than this gets rejected as “liberal” or “new age” or worse.

What is more concerning is the fact that all around the world people are frustrated with the seeming impotence of this “gospel”.  War and genocide ravages countries that we are told were 80% “Christian”.  Poverty continues while “Christian” countries arm themselves with weapons that can destroy the whole earth 60 times over.  (and this is done in the name of “defense”.  what will be left to defend once they have used their arms against their enemies????)  And while a majority of people on this planet proclaim a belief in a benevolent and ultimate power who created the world (and called it “good”?) still humanity struggles to live in ways that is sustainable and respectful of the planet, the only source of oxygen, water and food that we all have at our disposal…

So, it’s not surprising that many have simply stopped using the lid of the puzzle as their guide.  They have rejected organised religion and have decided to live their lives as best they can without the restrictions and prescriptions of religion (they are just getting on with doing the puzzle piece by piece as best they can).  Many of them would say they are deeply spiritual, but not particularly religious.  Which is, if you think about it, a good observation.  Every person IS spiritual - having a spirit which was given to them at birth.  If they are doing anything, they are focusing on living meaningfully in the present, finding odd pieces of the puzzle that fit and putting them together.  These small discoveries might not get them finishing the puzzle, but reflect more good and positive progress than religion offered them previously.

Others are soldiering on faithfully trying to make the pieces fit the picture on the box.  The old story of Jesus has become a matter of life and death.  If you don’t accept that Jesus died on the cross to save us from the wrath of God which would put us in a fiery furnace for eternity to placate his(?) own sense of justice, but because blood was shed now he is willing to have us with him in heaven for glorious eternity providing we say we believe…  If you don’t accept this is the picture that should be guiding us, you’re basically a heretic unbeliever who is going to hell like all the other unbelievers.

And then McClaren suggests there are some who are suggesting we reconsider our “framing story” - our understanding of Jesus and his purpose - which in the metaphor would be like getting the correct picture so that the pieces begin to make sense and fitting them together begins to progress more positively.  For McClaren, the new (correct?) picture for the puzzle is given to us by Jesus when he talks about the Kingdom of God.  The Kingdom of God is the main theme of Jesus’ teaching and is a vision of life lived God’s way - according to God’s values and God’s way.  This new vision (picture) allows us to make better sense of our lives - their purpose and ultimate destiny - and will assist us to live more meaningfully in the present, on this earth, as well as prepare us for the eternal destiny that God has prepared…

Throwing away the old picture doesn’t mean giving up on Jesus or the church.  Although some of the things associated with Jesus and the Church may need to go.  But perhaps it means we see these things in a new way - with new eyes - and are able to live more healthily in our daily lives because of this new vision.

“choose your enemies carefully because they will define you” - u2, cedars of lebanon

a colleague of mine often makes reference to “an enemy-loving community” when he talks about the community that has faith in Jesus.  This seems to be one of the most clearly described values of Jesus - and one that he lived out right to the point of death.  Whatever the enemy threw at him, he refused to hate them.  We can reflect on what enabled Jesus to do that - and we should - but the key thing to begin with is recognition that this was not just a path Jesus had to follow so that we wouldn’t have to..  but rather a path he taught, calling us to embrace the value.  He initiated the way and walked ahead of us, calling us to follow.

So Brian McClaren makes this painful observation at a Conference in Magaliesburg this week:

“The Way of a man of peace and reconciliation and liberation who was tortured and killed by powerful people became a powerful religion that defended oppression, torture and violence in the name of this very man.”

Till we really wrestle with how we treat our enemies, I don’t think we have really grappled deeply with the teaching and life of Jesus of Nazareth.  How we feel about our enemies is another matter all together.  Those who have hurt us, abused us and attacked us… their actions are not condoned, nor should they ever be sanctioned.  But as Desmond Tutu observes, “pain, if not transformed, will be transmitted”.  Transformation and Healing is desperately needed in our lives, lest the pain be transmitted, through our words and actions, and through our children to following generations.  Our pain is not ignored of overlooked by Jesus.  His suffering on the cross is precisely the moment of solidarity.  We do not suffer alone.

But what we DO with our pain will become the central question of our lives.  And somehow our enemies become the symbol of everything that salvation is about.  Will they (and we) be destroyed - wiped off the face of the earth?  Or can this situation of conflict, animosity, abuse and violence be redeemed?

who is your enemy today?

it’s a big day for our country!  Mr Mbeki was recalled by his party, the ruling ANC.  And today he resigned.  Good move.  if he was impeached by a vote of MP’s in parliment, he would have lost his pension.

so i’m expecting people to react with concern and anxiety.  fair enough it’s not an everyday occurence that a president resigns.

but consider this.  our northern neighbour has had the same president for nearly 30 years - the only head of government in that country since liberation in 1980.  many people who fear change in our country often site Zimbabwe as a sign of things to come.

but today we experienced our second change in president in the first 14 years of our fledgling democracy.  Not only did our beloved first president graciously step down after his first term - setting the stage for a different tradition of leadership.  Now our second president has been peacefully deposed by political rivals and will be replaced by a care-taker president till elections next year.  And please note - not a single drop of blood shed.  how different to the story of our northern neighbour.

Now please note - all you lovers of democracy (whether you agree with Mbeki being asked to step down or not, whether you like Jacob Zuma or not) - this transition of power is a sign of maturity.  And if, in the next few days, cabinet ministers stick around and agree to work with the new president, that will also be a sign of democratic maturity.  Mbeki’s resignation can (must?) be seen as the result of a democratic process within the ANC.  Other alternatives are a coup - a violent unlawful change of leadership - and revolution - forceful, usually violent but morally justified change in leadership.  Even if Mbeki had chosen to stay and fought impeachment in Parliment, that would have been a more protracted process, but still an extension of the democratic process.

And if, as some have predicted, followers of Mbeki move out to form a rival political movement, to contest the next elections…  that could also be a sign of democratic and political maturity as our political landscape begins to reflect greater diversity, challenging the single-minded and uniform stronghold the ANC has in Parliment.  No political party should enjoy (i believe) an outright majority in Parliment.  A change in the constitution should always be the result of multi-party consultation and agreement.  When opposing political groups have to come together to effect a change in the constitution, then there is safety that changes are not just being made to suit the best interests of a political party, rather than the best interests of the country.  (A good example of the ANC majority in parliment being misused was the decision to allow floor-crossing.)

many things can be said about the events of today.  and everyone is justified their opinion.  the one thing that can not be said about us today is that we are a banana republic.  political intrigue and power mongering is alive and well in our Republic…

Viva Democracy Viva!

how often do you install software on your pc?  just today a bubble popped up to tell me that Windows had downloaded “critical updates”.  Naturally i clicked the button to install the updates, only to be confronted by that regular (and for me, awkward) screen entitled “User agreement”.  Along with all the other Windows users around the world I was asked to read 93 pages of legally binding agreement, before installing the updates…

i want to know

• who reads all that legal stuff?
• do the people who write it expect us to?
• if not, is it binding?
• why do “critical updates” for software you already paid for and legally own (along with clicking on “AGREE” when you first installed it) require further legal contract?
• do i really have a choice to NOT AGREE?
• can i click AGREE and argue later that I did so in order to gain access to the software, but not with any intention of entering into legal contract because it’s unreasonable to ask a person to read 93 pages every time their pc (automatically) downloads updates…

the more interesting thing than the challenges of living ethically in a digital and internet age is the issue of trust.  we who like to think of ourselves as highly rational, never entering into a situation without consideration of the facts, display a lot of willingness to trust - perhaps not in traditional ways, like trusting a partner or trusting the divine…  and yet it’s still trust.

what if we were to discover that less of our life (our choices, our circumstances, etc.) is determined by “facts” than we like to think… and much more of our life than we recognise is actually determined by trust?

at the core of every person is an energy center called the heart.  just like the physical heart pumps blood, so the spiritual heart wants.  that’s just what it does.

I think we don’t make decisions rationally (i.e. with our minds)  I think we follow our hearts.  And our minds rationalise the longing…

we do exactly as we like!

(which is to say, everything we do is in response to a hearts desire.)

you may argue that you do “unselfish” things which go against your heart’s desires.  (like washing the dishes).  But I would still ask what made you do the unselfish thing…  did you want to be seen to be helpful? kind? generous?  what desire motivated you to do something you don’t enjoy?

i don’t think it’s helpful to regard the heart in terms of right and wrong.

E.g. A little boy who sees a porcelain vase and wants to touch it…  the longing to touch it is neither right or wrong.  it just is.  the desire to touch may lead to a broken vase.  But the desire itself is not wrong.  Why does the little boy want to touch the vase? Now, that’s an interesting question that may never be explored if we simply condemn the heart’s desire.

Why does the happily married man of 28 years want to leave home for a passionate relationship with his secretary?  Condemn the longing, and you’ll probably never get any insight into that potentially painful set of circumstances…

To change a person’s behaviour requires a change of heart!

The work of heart-change is really the key to all meaningful reflection on transformation.  “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also…”

the literal meaning of the word muslim is “one who submits to God”.  if that be the case, i am (proudly) a muslim.

the history of the relationship between christians and muslims has been one of opposition and conflict.  having grown up in the “christian west” i have experienced the way that history is retold.  For me, this always included a certain way of speaking about Islam that portrayed that religion in terms of threat.

Even today, with conflict in the middle east, people in (relatively) unaffected southern africa have strong opinions and characteristic ways of speaking about Muslims.

I think christians (and especially the zealous kind) have a lot in common with many muslims.  We are keen to share our convictions with others.  We believe we have found the “truth” and that we are (more) right than anyone else.  We are sincerely convinced that we know the way to please God.  We appeal to our scriptures as a primary (and final) authority.

In fact, christians who view the Bible as a product of divine inspiration with no real human involvement in it’s authorship reflect a strong resembalnce to to the most common Islamic view of the Q’uran.  For most Muslims the Q’uran is believed to be an accurate word-for-word transcription of the “original” text given to the prophet Mohammed to record.  These are the exact words of Allah given to people to aid their submission to the Almighty.

Not all Christians understand the Bible in this way.  In fact, I would argue that in the Christian tradition, this view of scripture is not the way of the faithful through the ages.  Faithful Christ-following has been a product of careful interpretation of scripture.  The perception of the Bible as a book that dropped out of heaven can be seen as a relatively recent historical occurence which reflects a deviation from the traditional interpretive understanding.

Last year I attended a Muslim Propogation Soceity rally.  I felt safe and respected.  The speakers were sincere.  They communicated a respect for other views.  They reminded us that people can be sincerely wrong or simply ignorant.  They sought to help us understand the limits of our knowledge and understanding by showing the relative value of adopting the Islamic view of various things.  I think they were sincerely moticated by loving conern.  If they are right, and if we are misguided, shouldn’t they seek to share their insight with us - for our benefit?  (a familiar argument?)  Mostly they compared the Bible with the Q’uran showing how (if we accept the assumption that Holy Scriptures drop out of the sky from God to humans) the Q’uran is a far more reliable source than the Bible. (which from a scrictly textual critical perspective it is!)

They also encouraged us to acknowledge (properly) the belief in ONE God - identifying the dangers of Trinitarian thinking - and taking Christians to their own Bible, showed them that in the original Hebrew texts, the name for God is recorded as “Allah”.

At question time I  stood up and  conceded that if to be a Muslim one needed to “submit to the will of [the one] GOd”, then I was a Muslim!  The room cheered and I was rewarded with a complimentary copy of the Q’uran.  I then asked a curious question about interpretations of the Q’uran (recognising from my own experience of the Bible that the greatest problems are not about agreeing on the sources of the text, but rather on how those texts should be understood…)

The speaker was not willing to concede that there are significant differences in interpretations of the Q’uran, by different “schools” or “teachers”…  Perhaps in a more frank and open conversation - without the need to convince a crowd - a Muslim may acknowledge some difficulties with the interpretation and application of the text to current and contextual challenges.  Somehow I find it hard to believe that there are not varying opinions within Islam on how the “law” is to be interpretted.

If only we could see beyond the competition.

I am not suggesting that Islam and Christianity are “different paths up the mountain”.  I think they are distinct and unique and different in many significant ways.  And I am even clearer now (having visited a Muslim rally) that I am a Jesus-follower.  What I am suggesting is that we have more in common than we would like to admit.  And that if we could re-member our “history” and reconsider some of our opposition stories there might be space for us to tell stories of humanity and relationship… stories of living as neighbours and stories of respect and mutual understanding.

At the very least, i think we could stop killing each other!

my early mentor and role-model in the ministry wrote this in a Christmas letter…

Response to Jacob Zuma’s election – at last the voice of the poor is being heard in South Africa! I think there’s little to fear in what’s happened - in fact it’s a chance to start again, in a country with huge riches, to share what we have (e.g. our GINI coefficient is still amongst the worst in the world.) And the story’s not about one man (unlike the Mbeki style). And even if Zuma is convicted, the new Deputy, Kgalema Motlante, has long experience in governance.

besides always being interested in what he has to say about things like this, i’m also always interested to hear an alternative voice. I personally think that most objections to Zuma have tended toward the moralistic (read judgemental) and reflect the affluent preference for a “Mbeki” who will not rock the economic boat too much. i think it is helpful to interpret Zuma’s election in terms of the poor needing to be heard!

I am a friend of Gay and Lesbian people. If their choices make them sinners (and I’m not saying that they do), then I’m a Friend of Sinners. Crucify me!

The tough thing for them is that they have to deal with being friendly toward a big sinner themselves…

(tonight I will be interviewing a Gay man as a part of a series of conversations inviting the church to listen with compassion to “voices from the outside”. If you pray, pray that we will learn to listen with compassion to the voices that are marginalised in our culture and society… I pray that the church will offer leadership on how to handle the vast challenges of diversity and conflict in this shrinking global village…)

I’ve been following a discussion about a how three influential leaders of a ministry called “Exodus” - which was committed to helping Gay and Lesbain people “come out” of a homosexual lifestyle - have publically withdrawn from the work, stating that they no longer believe that it is healthy to try to change people’s sexual orientation… If you’re interested in reading further: go here
One of the common arguments amongst Christians who have accepted that Gay and Lesbian people really do have a different sexual orientation is the “Love the sinner, Hate the sin” position. (other’s take the position that there is no such thing as a homosexual orientation - otherwise you have to explain why God would have created people like that!)

But I’m wondering how I can separate “homosexual orientation” from “homosexual activity”? i mean, what is a sexual orientation if it’s not (at some point) going to be acted upon?

(more…)