[This is an email that I sent to a friend this past week during a discussion about our congregation, Pasadena Mennonite Church. I had raised concerns about a possible overemphasis in social justice issues in the Bible reading of our church's membership. My friend (correctly) challenged me on generalizing about the congregation being too justice-oriented, suggesting that it is a good counter to all the congregations that ignore (or are antagonistic to) those issues. My response turned out to be, I think, a good articulation of many things I've been thinking in the past few years regarding Bible reading and relates to the title of this blog (what it means to live "according to the book"). I've taken all identifiers out of the text, so as not to incriminate my friend!]
Dear Friend,
Thanks so much for your comments. I can resonate with so much of what you say. I think you are right to point to my overstatement of the situation. I’m sorry if I’ve mentioned my concerns several times, I didn’t realize I was as outspoken about it as you say. But I don’t doubt it’s true. You’re also right that I am oversaturated with social justice issues. It has a lot to do with my own journey. I tend to get uncomfortable with things when one aspect of faith is emphasized over another, be it spirituality or social justice/peace concerns. Towards the end of college I started to get really into social justice concerns. And I went gung ho down that road to the detriment of other aspects of my faith.
I have to tell you a story that I think of all the time when it comes to this topic. During one of our Bible studies in our small group from PA several years ago, I got into a heated debate with my friend Chris. We got to talking about what was the most important part of serving a person in need, giving bread to the hungry, for example. Chris made a comment that what matters most is not the act of service itself, but your willingness to follow God in discipleship. I argued that God ultimately wants the hungry person to be fed and that the most important part of the action was that the hungry person no longer be hungry (we grossly oversimplified the problem of world hunger for the sake of the argument).
Although neither of us were saying the other part was unimportant, Chris thought that I was calling him selfish and I felt he thought I wasn’t being spiritual enough about it. We went back and forth in a very tense-filled room until one of our friends made the astute observation that Chris is in a place of spiritual revival right now and I am trying more and more to discover what it means to be a Christian with social justice concerns. You two are just emphasizing what is important to you in your journey right now, our friend observed. Chris and I prayed for one another and hugged afterwards, but I always remember that debate. Nowadays I go back and forth on it within myself. I tend to think that both are equally important, but the question makes me feel very uncomfortable (in a good way).
So I will certainly admit that my frustration comes more from my own walk than from the true makeup of PMC. I know that there are wonderful people who love the Bible and have very deep spiritual lives, which shows in the way they attend to others around them. I find great comfort from these people (because I’m not one of them! My spiritual life could use much more depth).
I do understand your concern to be a loud voice for social issues in order to swing the pendulum of the larger church more towards peace and justice. I think I agree with the idea. What concerns me is the way we (or any Christian) approach(es) the Bible. When I read the Bible, am I looking for something in particular? Be it justice or peace or Spirit-baptism or predestination or health-and-wealth-gospel, I think it is wrong for me to only read the Bible looking for the things that will comfort me in my view of faith and the world. I don’t want the Bible to be used like the U.S. Constitution for Democrats and Republicans, picking out the parts they like (their proof texts) and throwing them at the other side. I’m not saying that people at PMC do this, but I think the danger is there for all Christians and I think we should be aware of it. Our church is a solid peace and justice church, we will more likely look for peace and justice when we read the Bible. It’s natural.
But I think that we should allow everything to be challenged when we read the Bible (and when we pray, for that matter). One of the verses that really challenges me on this is Hebrews 4:12: “Indeed, the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from marrow; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.” I knew a lot of fellow Evangelical youths when I was in high school who called the Bible their “sword” as if it were a weapon against the big ol’ nasty world, when really that sword is pointed at us…. me. One of my profs claims that no Christians actually change their minds by reading the Bible, they just reinforce what they already believe and explain away things that they don’t like. I’d like to prove her wrong.
I am completely on your side when it comes to trying to get more people motivated towards action. I am disturbed that we do not put our money where our mouths are (at least not all of us). One of the reasons that I think it could be more talk than action is because our faith is not holistic enough. In our ethics class, Erin emphasized the importance of “character ethics,” which basically refers to the idea that what we do stems from our character. If we are spiritually-shaped disciples of Jesus, we will be prepared to do things that seem impractical by worldly standards, but serve God’s concerns in the world. It gets back to that whole debate I had with Chris. We need to be disciples, both inwardly and outwardly. If we are nourished by Scripture and the movements of the Holy Spirit, I believe we will be spurred towards action and not just words. This is a challenge to myself more than anybody else.
So I’m saying that I agree with you about our emphasis as a congregation, but I think we need to be careful we don’t bring our emphasis into our reading of Scripture and our prayer lest we miss God’s attempt to mold us from the inside out.
I really should be packing instead of writing this, but I am enjoying this discussion with you. It’s helping me to articulate myself more carefully. I hope that I won’t be as careless with generalizations in the future.
Peace,
Pat
Although I wasn’t privy to this particular argument, I’ve had similar conversations with others at our church. Personally I’m not a big fan of the “counterbalance” theory. For one thing, it seems to be setting up an odd relationship between churches, at once hostile and interdependent. There’s an implicit criticism in saying these other churches need to be counterbalanced, yet instead of having our church be a truer, more balanced church, it’s saying let’s go too far the other way and maybe the truth will emerge in the middle somewhere. Which doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.
Another problem, though, is how are we categorizing “personal” and “political”? In a previous discussion about this I remarked that, although Christians tend to be divided between people who care about sex and people who care about public policy, I think that sex is political, since (for instance) the fact that something like 40% of our generation grew up with divorced parents is bound to affect the body politic, and the way we look at the world and relate to other people. So the whole personal holiness/social justice polarity is a problem, imho.
Thanks Camassia!I can resonate with both of your concerns. I am quite ambivalent about the counterbalance of churches. I do think it would be unhealthy for social justice issues to be our sole focus. I think we do have some inkling of a healthy balance.About the personal/political false dichotomy, I think I agree. I would add a thought about communal holiness (as in: the pursuit of holiness by local faith communities) as well as personal. How do you think this idea applies to the situation in our church?
Oh, I agree that our church is more balanced that way than many. I just meant the counterbalance theory lends itself to extremism that way, so I don’t like the idea of someone bringing it up to explain our church.
I’m curious as to what you mean by communal holiness. Can you give an example?
Good question. I think what I mean is the act of keeping each other accountable and journeying together as a group. I see it especially happening in community groups praying for one another.
I have been a part of “accountability groups” in the past (not at PMC), with a small group of other guys, confessing our sins to one another and embodying forgiveness to one another.
As these sorts of things occur in the intricate web of a local congregational community, I see “communal holiness” in the interactions between these various groups, with accountability and encouragement happening in both committed smaller groups and individuals from the wider congregational community. I hope that makes sense.
Actually, I think this could be a uniting factor between personal holiness and social justice. The community seeks to be “holy” in uniting all its individuals in pursuit of personal holiness and in an outward drive to share the blessings which have been given to us as individuals and communal whole.
Again, I hope this makes sense. I’ve got my mind spread 20 different ways as finals approach!