I’ve never seen an olive tree, but I know the nature of
vines. I had a gorgeous grape vine wrapping around the back of my house for a
few years, before I decided that I was fed up and exhausted with managing wild
and unruly things. We cut it down but left a long stump, just in case, because
wild and unruly can be all kinds of awesome, and because it is just not a good reason
to kill. That thing looks dead – deader than dead – but,
wow, does it know how to grow.
When I look at that vine, I always think spiritual. I always think about how Jesus is the vine and of these verses
from Romans, Paul’s words to the church in Rome about their place in the order
of things. Do not be conceited, but fear
– you are not the tree, you are not the
root. You are a branch, and a branch can be broken off. I look at that
church in Rome now, how it contrasts with my own, and I know Church has never stopped being a
hodgepodge of long, twisting branches seeking the Light and Living Water in a
thousand different directions.
I believe the Church has a gross addiction to religion. Sometimes I am afraid of being
a part of a branch about to be lopped off.
I wonder how you can tell whether or not you yourself have finally just been shut up in disobedience. I have a
miserable penchant for disobedience.
We Christians can be more than a little arrogant – a little
wild and unruly, a little we are the world,
a little let’s take over. We have a long,
documented history of devastating people in the name of God and righteousness.
We also have a long history of saying, But
those weren’t real Christians. I’m
sure I don’t know how to draw lines around who constitutes a real Christian.
Jesus said it like this – You will know them by their fruits. Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord,
Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father
who is in heaven. (Matthew 7:20-21).
The saving right arm of God, His Word in the form of flesh, said,
Therefore, however you want people to
treat you, so treat them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. (7:12)
The Prince of Peace and Son of Righteousness said, Do not judge lest you be judged. For in the
way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be
measured to you. (7:2)
I don’t think these verses are out of context for talking
about our response as Christians to Bill 18. I know that we praise God that we
live in a free country, that we are
able to be our whole selves openly, to worship God fully and freely without any
fear from our government, with the full support of our government when we are
infringed upon. We are grateful to God that we have the legal right in every public
school in our country to start up a prayer group, or a Bible study, or any kind
of Christian Alliance. We embrace the law, we give thanks to God for its
covering, because it really is our supporter.
I think we are like this with God’s Law, sometimes. We love
to have it humble before us and washing our feet, but we really don’t like it
to convict us. We really don’t like it to boss us around, or to bring us down
to our knees before somebody else who is dirty.
Law is a servant to us, but it is not our Servant – it only ever kneels before us in
order to teach us the way. God’s Law
peers straight into the heart leaving
no table unturned, no stone unrolled – and the heart can be a desperately wicked
place. Cleansing that temple can get more than a little messy.
I have little doubt that Christians could crucify Jesus all
over again, if given half the chance. What he asked people to do really
offended their understanding of righteousness.
Jesus really upset people’s ideas about how to please God. Jesus had contempt
for religion.
Jesus did not come in any way to abolish His Law, he came to
fulfill it. He came to demonstrate it. He came to satisfy it. In every interaction
he had with people, he fulfilled the Spirit of the Law – he was the Law of God
in action – and he said, This is how you
do it. You love the Lord your God with all your heart, and you love your neighbour
as you love yourself. It isn’t complicated – it’s just really hard
sometimes. It doesn’t leave any room for self-righteous.
You don’t get a gold star for doing what’s right.
You don’t get a gold star for loving.
Years ago I came across a beautiful Star of David necklace
and decided I wanted to wear it. People wear crosses all the time as jewelry – why should it be any different,
I reasoned. It wasn’t meant to be a conversation piece. Jesus was a Jew, I
loved Jesus, the necklace was beautiful – at the time, I couldn’t really see
the problem. I hadn’t had a lesson in appropriating.
Sitting outside of a gymnastics class one evening, a blonde
haired boy of not more than nine (with whom I happened to be playing a game of Go Fish, and who happened to be the
gymnastics instructor’s son), looked at my necklace, recognized it and spoke
words to me that I will never, ever forget – Are you a Jew? I hate Jews. I looked at him, shocked, as his face blushed
a confused contempt even he did not understand. I scanned the faces of the other
women seated on the floor, as I was, with their backs against the wall. They
all looked stunned and embarrassed, but nobody said a thing.
In that moment, all that was running through my mind was, God. They all think I’m a Jew – and they are
all totally watching me be hated on by a CHILD – and nobody is saying ANYTHING –
and I don’t know what to DO. I had never, ever in my life experienced
racism before. Judging by the epidemic of I
don’t know what to do, I doubt anyone within hearing had ever felt or witnessed
it in quite that way before, from such an innocent, with such an absence of
shame. I think it was like watching somebody get hit by a bus, and suddenly not
knowing what number to call for an ambulance.
I knew that I was feeling very, very mad, and when I am very, very mad I don’t generally control my
tongue – but I knew in this moment that I had
to. I had just been painted with a wide, ugly brush, and now I was representing
a people. It’s a huge reality check when
you discover that you have inadvertently taken it upon yourself to impersonate
someone else, to a room full of people who don’t have your back. But I knew
that whatever I was going to say, the only one thing I absolutely did not feel like saying was, No, I’m not a Jew.
So I said simply, That
is called ‘racism’ – and he said, sincerely confused, What is? We had a brief but meaningful one-sided conversation, in
which I explained to him what that word means and exactly why it is not ok.
Then I had the conversation again with his mother. She was apologetic and
horrified and said something harsh to her son in another language that made
tears well in his eyes and made his face red with shame. Important things are
missed when you can’t translate, but one thing that doesn’t need language for
you to hear it is fear – whatever she
said to him, it didn’t sound much like I
am not raising you to be a racist, and did sound a whole lot like maybe, you’re going to get me fired.
Sometimes there are things that we just simply don’t see,
unless we can actually step out of our own shoes and into another person’s for
an hour. I saw racism like I had never seen racism before – because that child was talking about me. He hated me, and he didn’t even know me – and it could not have mattered
less that I wasn’t even what he thought I was. That was the whole point –
he didn’t know a single thing about me other than that I had played Go Fish with him while he waited in
boredom for his mom, but he was prepared to hate me anyway. Whether
intentionally, or inadvertently, he had been taught to hate me.
As worried as the Church tends to get sometimes about being persecuted, that has never once
been part of my own life or faith experience – never once, until I was somebody else. I would not have been
surprised to hear that that little blonde boy was a Christian.
Maybe it is time – maybe it is long past time for the Church
to feel again what it means to truly be on the outside, what it feels like to suffer indignity and abuse from the
mouths of children, and to learn what exactly it means that the servant is not above the Master.
Maybe this is a really good time for us to weigh out carefully our neighbour’s need for respect, rights and
freedoms, and to value it as more important than our own. We clearly don’t know
what to do with ours.
I don’t think that Bill 18 is a shining example of the
excellence of law and, honestly, I just don’t think it is going to work. It
does little more than illustrate, on paper and in conversation, how completely
insufficient Law is when it comes to transforming us into better people. Law
cannot save us where we truly need saving – only Love can do that. You can make
concerted efforts to expose and to educate, but you can’t legislate against fear and people are always going to be mean.
I know there are layers to the conversation, and that the
split ground appears to fall between the sanctity of human dignity and the
sanctity of the words of the One who made us. There are a lot of very
meaningful and important conversations that need to take place around those issues,
inside the Church.
There has been a lot of concern expressed over the wording
of Bill 18, and there are rumblings in some places about how it is one in a
series of steps towards full-on persecution of the Church. This really, really bugs
me. While it may be an example of legal incompetence, I do believe it is a
sincere attempt to do away with breeding grounds for hate, subtle and overt, and
to set a standard of respect and support to a wide spectrum of people who are right now, today persecuted, disenfranchised,
attacked and made to feel in a thousand ways, both subtle and overt, like they
are somehow less than.
Nobody is asking anyone to understand or to approve –
what is required of us all is simply respect
as equal citizens under the law in a free country. As Christians, we could be at
the forefront of that effort. If we were at all doing our job as Christians,
Bill 18 would not even be necessary – because, supposedly, there are billions of us. We are not loving the
way Jesus said to love – we are not always treating people the way we want to
be treated. We say ‘Lord, Lord’, but we are not always doing the will of our
Father.
Things we fear we will be subject to should we begin to lose
pieces of our Religious Rights and
Freedoms, other people already live with every day. In Synagogues in this
country, police officers routinely roam the building during Passover services
because of threats of violence against gathered God-worshippers. I’m not sure
why we think we should be exempt from that as a life experience. I’m not sure
why we aren’t joining forces and up in arms about that. Why do we only grow teeth when it’s about us and our values? Isn’t countering hate one of our values?
To my mind, there is just something so unbecoming about the
Church in North America fighting for its
rights. We’ve been indulged past the point of bloating with rights and freedoms. Perhaps it’s the
pacifist in me, maybe I’m a little too much lay
down and die, but it deeply offends my conscience. But of all things to get
fretful about, why would the Church – any church – engage in a fight
for Freedom of Religion?
We are not even supposed to have religion. We are always so quick to say how much God hates
religion.
The question I have to ask myself, and the one I want to ask
my brothers and sisters in Christ, is this: if your Religious Freedom is infringed upon, what necessary thing won’t
you still be free to do? What power
or principality can stop us from doing what is good and what God requires of us
– to do justly, to love mercy and to walk
humbly with God?
What if by some remarkable series of end-times events the Church did actually become the persecuted, and what if
Christ-followers were reduced to this: They
will know we are Christians by the love we have one for another. It’s the
old question they used to ask us in Youth Group – would there even be enough
evidence to convict you?
What if by some predestined series of events Christians began
to suffer great violations, indignities, were treated unjustly, had threats
made against their lives, were made fun of, beat up, refused service, feared
and hated by children, marginalized, stripped down and reduced only to this: But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace,
forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Is that
fruit actually growing in your life?
Because, the thing is – Against such things there is no law.
Do nothing from selfishness
or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another
as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal
interests, but also for the interests of others. Have this attitude in
yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form
of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied
Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of
men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient
to the point of death, even death on the cross. ~Philippians 2:3-8
16 comments:
Thank you, Tamara, for your article. You asked some really good questions. I will do my best to answer each one...
1. "If your Religious Freedom is infringed upon, what necessary thing won’t you still be free to do?"
Well, at Steinbach Christian High School, teachers will lose the freedom to say "no thanks" to student organizations that would teach the religious viewpoint that premarital and/or homosexual sexual activity is moral and acceptable.
2. "What power or principality can stop us from doing what is good and what God requires of us – to do justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with God?"
Nothing.
3. "What if by some remarkable series of end-times events the Church did actually become the persecuted, and what if Christ-followers were reduced to this: They will know we are Christians by the love we have one for another. It’s the old question they used to ask us in Youth Group – would there even be enough evidence to convict you?"
There most certainly will be enough evidence to convict us, because the Bible teaches that we will be known by our fruit.
4. "What if by some predestined series of events Christians began to suffer great violations, indignities, were treated unjustly, had threats made against their lives, were made fun of, beat up, refused service, feared and hated by children, marginalized, stripped down and reduced only to this: But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Is that fruit actually growing in your life?"
I pray that it is; in fact, it had better be! If I do not demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit in my life, I am not a true follower of Christ, am I?
"I will not allow deceivers to serve in my house, and liars will not stay in my presence." Ps. 101:7 (NLT)
God bless you, Tamara!
Ken McAllister
Steinbach, MB
Thank you for commenting, Ken. My children attend a private Christian school, and so I am truly sensitive to the slip-sliding implications of the Bill as it stands.
Thank you also for the quote from Psalms. It is a great reminder to me what a wretched sinner I am. I know in my soul that we are none of us saved by our own righteousness, but only by the blood of Christ and by his immeasurable, unfailing Grace.
I will add that, for me, point #1 is not a 'necessary' religious freedom. I would have other concerns, but not that particular one. If anything, that would just make it clearer who the kids are who are in need of extra kindness and support. I can't imagine how terrifying it must be for a child to struggle to understand their identity and sexuality in the middle of a community that doesn't know how to love them. I think we can do better for those kids than we are doing. A lot better.
I hear a lot of people comment about how this legislation is poorly written. Why would you say so? Do you have any expertise in the matter? (serious question- I haven't heard anything detrimental to the bill by people with expertise but perhaps there is a different opinion.)
That is a valid question, Kimberly, and no, I don't have any expertise on matters of law. I couldn't begin to critique where exactly it falls apart, except to say that I believe my children's school already does a superb job of teaching my children to be good citizens, and it is able to hold my children accountable for their actions to a level that the public school system was never able to. They invest into my children, into their character, teaching them kindness, integrity, courage, responsibility. They love my children, they see them as whole people, and I cherish the values that are being instilled in them. I am deeply concerned for any legislation that would interfere with their authority to do that by presuming a superior wisdom or value system.
I hear what you are saying, but I'm not sure this legislation would endanger the basic values taught in your school. Where do you see that being the case?
My children's (public) school also does a fantastic job of teaching my children community values and of respecting their individuality and person-hood.
However, there are many schools (as you have experienced and as was evident in the news today with the poster decision) that need some guidelines on these issues.
There is no need for this legislation to change schools that are doing well. It's simply setting out good practice.
I wish I were equipped to have a conversation about it, but it wasn't really the intent of the blog post to go in that direction. There are plenty of other places where that is being competently discussed by wiser, better informed people. :) My thoughts and concerns here are really more about how we as Christians can do a better job of loving like Jesus, because it does seem like we're very confused amongst ourselves what that is supposed to look like.
Yes, and I certainly share your concerns in that regard. The reason that I commented (because I'm either YES! or questions it seems :) ) is that I was surprised at how vigorously you denounced the wording of the document. I thought that perhaps you had read something I missed. And I figure that if one puts something out there, they're ready to talk about it. Thanks for your replies!
Ah yes, I see. If I was 'vigorous, I meant it to be against the law in general. It is only that I sincerely don't think it's going to work. I don't think it's going to stop bullying from happening. I don't doubt its intention, but I don't think its capable of doing what it intends to do, which is presumably to bring an end to bullying. People are mean sometimes, people react to one another out of fear, insecurity, mistrust, their own hurt. I have children who hurt each other, and who get hurt by one another, and I have rules coming out of every orifice. I have a child who is hyper-sensitive, and a child who is sensory seeking, and they have to get along together in one house - you can't legislate against meanness or hurt feelings. There are deeper values and deeper work that are required, in my opinion.
I love that you commented. I was completely terrified to post it, and I'm still not entirely sure it says what I wanted it to. It is heavily edited, and so emphasis shifted here and there along the way.
Yes, I agree that the bill won't stop bullying. However, I don't think any legislation can ever dictate behaviour. That is an individual matter of the heart. I think legislation can create the environment to encourage change of hearts. It evolves the community framework in order that the people can be taught and encouraged to embrace their community. Just as integration legislation couldn't keep people from being bigots in the American south, or that inclusion practices in schools can keep children from bullying children with disabilities, but it can normalize the "other" and that is hugely successful in reducing bullying. It's hard to learn to love the "other" if they are not visible.
This legislation also allows both parents and principals to have a definition of bullying that includes a one-time incident as well as internet related incidents. This, I think is hugly important in that it allows a parent to go to a principal and demand action, and a principal can stress the seriousness of an issue with a stubborn parent.
I think it's great that you made your voice heard on this issue. I know it is no small matter to speak up and risk rejection and/or the picking apart of your argument. You have a unique heart and voice and it needs to be heard.
Excellent points, you are very wise. Thank you for your kind words. :) I'm wondering how you would respond to a person of faith who does believe that homosexuality is a sin in God's eyes, and not from a place of desiring not to see or embrace the 'other', but from a place of wanting to be pure in their obedience to their understanding of God. I think that for a great many Christians, there is an earnest struggle to know what to do with their desire to be faithful to God and to be faithful to their understanding of scripture, while at the same time actually knowing and loving a person who is gay, or wanting a sex change operation, or whatever the case. I think the struggle on that end can be excruciatingly painful as well - it requires a letting go or a compromise of something that is deeply sacred to them, whether it is a belief about God or an interpretation of text or inclusion in their own community. I don't think it's workable or realistic to simply say, 'You shouldn't believe that'. Faith is so intimate - at least as intrinsic and intimate to a person as their sexuality, I think - and a violation of it can be felt as a violation on the deepest level.
Hello again,
Very good questions -and ones that I have been thinking about and dealing with for several years, both in myself and others.
Thankfully, thankfully, I was already on a journey into the grey when I learned that a close cousin was gay. She lives far away but her family is close so I've been able to see their responses, and sort through things in my own heart. It's a slowly evolving journey.
For me, I realized the day I brought my infant son home from the hospital, right there on the curb by the car, that if I couldn't live with believing my theology when it came to my child, that my theology would have to change. From that day on, of course babies went to Heaven. No question. Of course God loved people who were gay, or sick, or troubled. Of course there is good in us. We are not all murderers except for the grace of God. I believe that God is a good father, and that the good parent in all of us is a reflection of the divine. If love is good and patient and kind, then God is good and patient and kind, and (I believe) theology should be good and patient and kind as well.
BUT that is me, and I can't expect that everyone will, or even should, think as I do. Granted we should all be encouraging each other to love and good deeds and so, when appropriate, I will challenge people on their beliefs. But that is not always helpful. Often one's best teaching is done with love and patience and prayer.
I do not believe that being gay is sinful and therefore I cannot agree with those who do. I can't even say that it's ok we disagree because it is not my life that is affected and shunned. But I can be patient and loving with them. How that looks, though, on a corporate church level, I have no idea. I am still very much grasping at straws.
I've been thinking a lot about the parallels to the anti-slavery movement and how traditionalists at the time were treated. So far I have more questions than answers. But I do know that our churches would never ever allow such racism these days. Though the issue of women is so entrenched and long standing that I have little trust that much of the church would have moved that way without government help. I do think, though that we are at the beginning of this issue (and that of women-though that is perhaps a bit father.) Will William Wilberforce show up in our generation or our children's? No idea. But the rumbling of discontent can be heard, and that gives me hope.
I just love your heart, and I sincerely appreciate you engaging me on the topic. I understand the slavery parallel, although I'm not sure it equates for me other than to express the gravity of it. Having said that, I don't really feel like I'm talking about something I know anything about as far as the LGBT community and what their experiences truly are. It feels like trying to talk with understanding and insight about a country I've never been to.
For me, it feels more 'Fiddler on the Roof', like if Reb Tevye's fourth daughter had said, 'I'm going to marry a woman'. People can only bend so far so fast. Some people in my Mennonite community are still learning to deal with people who marry out of our 'own kind', as I discovered to my surprise when I decided to marry an Icelander with a family of war veterans. It hadn't ever occurred to me that it might be frowned upon. :) Many churches are still learning how to 'love' divorced people - a growing group I would think often feels seriously 'disenfranchised', viewed as sinful, misrepresented, disapproved of, excluded from ministry, shunned, denied marriage by the church, etc.
With laws in place to ensure equal rights for all citizens, and with more and more families being compelled to face it for themselves in their homes and communities, I do think new understanding is growing. I think many people adopt a 'first do no harm' policy for themselves while they struggle through it or wait to find out what someone else believes, and it comes out in words like, 'Who am I to judge?' It perhaps sounds disingenuous, patronizing or prejudiced, but I do think it is meant as a sincere step towards something better than what it's been.
Assuming that the goal is actually sincerely about evolving a community and changing perceptions and prejudice, I believe there are more thoughtful approaches to that, and far more effective. I am suspect that this will serve to lessen true prejudice, to be honest - if anything, I would have concern that it might drive it deeper and diminish a community's own desire to self-correct.
I guess what is at the heart of my concern is simply 'separation of church and state', for the protection of both. A lot of private schools are literally extensions of their churches, and so it is the act of force in itself, not simply the content of the Bill. I don't see anything in my own experience of church or school or in my larger community that would warrant a violation of that nature. It is saying, 'We know what you believe, and we do not respect what you believe, and we are going to change what you believe.' I don't know that it's the government's place to do that.
But at the end of the day, people are not 'feeling the love', and the church really does need to address that seriously and thoughtfully.
I'm so glad to have this conversation. So, perhaps you are saying it is like saying to a person who is black, 'It is a sin for you to be black, but I love you anyway with the love of God'. And yes, when it is framed that way, it is completely horrifying. I will take that to heart, sincerely.
Yes, if one has no choice in being gay (and that is what the research is saying,) then it is exactly like colour. They should not be discriminated against for something they can not choose. That makes it unlike every other sin homosexuality is listed with in the Bible.
There is also the parallel between theological arguments. There is a book on my list to get (not in the library unfortunately) called "The Civil War as a Theological Crisis" that talks about this very thing. I haven't read it yet so I don't feel comfortable in saying "it says this" but the reviews http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/is-abolition-biblical and http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0807830127/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0807830127&linkCode=as2&tag=racheleva-20seem to indicate that the arguments about slavery went as follows:
"The Bible says people can have slaves, see verses such and such"
"But slavery was an reality at the time, it wasn't endorsed as the way things should be. And obviously God would not want this kind of life for His children. He wants to free us from slavery. Can't you see the big picture?"
"But this verse and this verse! Obviously you are a liberal who does not believe the Bible word for word! Sola Scriptura!"
So again, I haven't read the book, but there seem to be some very interesting parallels between that issue and a whole host of issues we are dealing with these days. And each side has very valid points. However, if we're going to agree to read the Bible differently in one area, we need to figure out how we're going to read it consistently.
On the other point about private schools, I'm very conflicted- and not in the way many seem to be. On one hand, I think that religious schools should be free to teach what they wish alongside the curriculum, especially if they are getting public money. (Granted, I think everyone should have to follow provincial curriculum, even homeschoolers, but that's a different debate! :) ) But yes, free to teach what they want. However, I don't think discrimination should be taught. At all. But what right does the state have to tell us that our religion is being discriminatory? That I think it the big question. How would we feel if a Mosque down the street taught children to hate all blue-eyed people? Or advocated for slavery? I don't think the answer is for schools to simply stop accepting government money and then be free to teach what they will (but that is certainly an option and many people feel that it is the answer to this issue for private schools and Bill 18) but that doesn't solve the underlying issue of discrimination for me. And I really, honestly, don't know what would.
I'll look for the reading you suggested. Thank you.
Post a Comment