Greetings, friends - I'm thrilled to see increasing numbers of Christians turning away from the entrenched culture-wars polarization of the religious right versus the secular left. As my friend Jim Wallis says, the best way to find common ground is to seek higher ground - and more and more people are leaving the "low ground" of polarization to find the higher holistic, integral mission of Jesus Christ.
The article below, from Minnesota, gives you a feel for the excitement that's brewing in many places in our country. Let's prayerfully see and participate in this moment. I'm currently working on a plan to mobilize Christians in our city - and with your help, maybe around the country and perhaps beyond - to bring the needs of our neighbors in Africa (especially Darfur) into the public light - to "change the wind" on behalf of the poor. Stay tuned for more details soon.
In the meantime, I hope you'll find some hope in this article from the Minneapolis Star Tribune. - Brian
Faith that's of the people, by the people, for the people
Nick Coleman, Star Tribune
April 8, 2005
We need a religious revival. And we may get one. ... The revival that Jim Wallis predicts.
Wallis, the author of the best-selling book, "God's Politics," spoke to an overflow crowd of 1,200 want-to-be believers at the Westminster Town Hall Forum on Thursday in Minneapolis and restored their faith in the F word:
Faith.
Faith, said Wallis, the editor of Sojourners Magazine, is not just about abortion and gay marriage. "Faith is about changing the big things." Things like poverty, or 30,000 children dying every day of disease and starvation or a pre-emptive, dishonest war.
But if it is to tackle the big things, Wallis says, the language and the values of faith have to be embraced by all of us, not just the right wing. And the left has to stop leaving God to the snake handlers and the TV pulpit pounders. The subtitle of "God's Politics" says it all: "Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It."
Christianity has been "hijacked" by the right, Wallis -- himself an evangelical -- said, and Americans who are more moderate and more progressive must speak out, and must begin to use their own faith.
"The monopoly of the religious right is now over," he said. "Religion must no longer be a weapon to divide us. How did Jesus become pro-rich, pro-war and only pro-America? It is time to take back our
faith."
Faith is personal but never private, he said, because beliefs contend in public. But most politicians just wet a finger and hold it up to see which way the wind is blowing, he said. So changing one set of
"wet-fingered politicians" for another won't help.
People of faith have to try to change the way the wind is blowing: "What changes history is not politicians but social movements," he said.
"The answer to bad religion is better religion," he said. "We've been conceding the entire territory of religion and values. That is a mistake progressives must never make again."
But it wasn't just progressives who came to Westminster Presbyterian Church. Wallis says many evangelical Christians are responding to his message, too, and many of them were on hand Thursday.
"You can be evangelical and still have a social conscience," said David Berge, 22, a Presbyterian youth director who came with his wife, Amy. "People are looking for a faith they can live out, that is genuine. Wallis breaks apart the fake distinctions and gives us a new way of thinking."
"We don't want to be red or blue," said Keith Meyer, executive pastor of the Church of the Open Door in Maple Grove, an evangelical "mega-church" that had 8,000 worshipers at Easter. "We just want to
have the cause of the poor at heart. There is a groundswell of people who, as [Wallis] said, don't think either party is responding to the whole mix of issues."
Meyer's church has helped start a church in north Minneapolis where 500 to 600 people worship each week. He said his church encourages members to get involved in politics, but more important, "We encourage people to get involved with the poor.
"Most of this is about the 'least,' " he said, referring to Jesus' words in the Gospel of St. Matthew: "As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it unto me."
Wallis underscored that point during a question-and-answer period: "Any Gospel that isn't 'good news' to poor people is simply not the Gospel of Jesus Christ," he said.
That kind of talk has gotten him labeled a radical. But it is resonating far beyond the ranks of liberals (former Vice President Walter Mondale and his wife, Joan, were there). It also is impressing
young people from conservative church schools, such as the Reconciliation Studies class of 20 students from Bethel University.
"We're trying to give voice to the issues Jim Wallis talks about," said Curtiss DeYoung, an associate professor who teaches the class. "Whether it's racism, sexism, poverty or war -- we're trying to talk
about how we build bridges. There must be some way we can get into conversation with each other on these questions. There must be some common ground."
Common ground? Among people of all faiths? Among people of all political stripes? On all of the issues of the day? Not just abortion and gay marriage? But war, poverty, racism, sexism, hunger and
injustice?
It's so crazy it might just work. But, Wallis says, in order to find common ground, we must seek higher ground.
Do you really believe this stuff, I asked him afterward. Do you really think there's a great revival coming?
Yes, he said. And we'll know it when we see it. Because things will look radically different. "Real revival has consequences, not just in people's lives, but in society," he said. "That's what church
historians have always said: It only becomes a revival if it changes something."
I hope to God he's right.
Nick Coleman is at [email protected].
I appreciate what Wallis is trying to do, but I think that he tends to misrepresent himself and his goals. If he is just about "higher ground" between the parties, why has he been working so closely with the Democrats--even advising them in different meetings how to use religious language "more effectively"? He has some good catch phrases, but when you listen to him, he tends to fall into criticizing Bush or recounting his own activism instead of outlining how his vision might be carried out. He just doesn't seem to be an equal opportunity critic (as one might expect), but seems to be working for one party's interests over the other.
God may not be a Republican or a Democrat, but it is pretty clear that one can't say the same for Wallis.
Posted by: chris lancaster | April 11, 2005 at 02:50 PM
I hit post too soon. I wanted to add that I think Brian might be in a better position to be an advocate for the kind of interaction that the church should have with politics than someone like Wallis. He has a rare set of skills that enables him to interact with people from different perspectives and call them to something higher--without stepping into one side or other.
Posted by: chris lancaster | April 11, 2005 at 03:01 PM
I think some reaction is appropriate given how co-opted the Faith has become by the Republican Right. Having said that, the old adage is true that Jesus "plus anything is a subtraction". Perhaps we can agree that some of the issues themselves which are reflected in scripture can be embraced by people of any party. In fact I was plesantly shocked to see Pat Robertson's face in the One.org commercial to fight the AIDS and poverty epidemic in Africa (and elsewhere)alongside Brad Pitt, Bono and the like. Good for him for taking the "higher ground".
What many of us fear is being aligned with a "gospel" of fear, hatred and greed. Some of us have increasing "issues" with the word "Christian" because it is about Right Wing politics and not the Love, grace and hope that we all have in Christ. So, we say "spiritual" and then on deeper discussion speak openly of our love and relationship with Jesus the Risen.
Jim Wallis is probably saddled with the "prophetic role"...one not so pleasant. Fortunately he's a good man with a deep and wide heart. The prophets often resorted to hypebole...as did Jesus. Maybe we need some here to level the playing field. But I am not discounting what you say Chris. And maybe you are right. Perhaps Brian is a good spokesperson to both audiences.
Posted by: Mac | April 11, 2005 at 06:48 PM
I couldn't agree more with Chris. The problem with Jim Wallis is that he is very much a proponent of leftist politics. I don't have a problem with that other than the fact that he is trying to find a middle ground and comes across as rather disingenuous.
Posted by: Dignan | April 11, 2005 at 08:37 PM
I really like the "post-conservative" and "post-liberal" stance that I've learned from Brian and others emergent. In the post paradigm, it’s OK to advise both factions, as well as those less addressed, like the Greens and Libertarians, how it’s a positive and inevitable thing for them to be emergent as well.
We as emergents will need to progress from what we’re not to what we are before we’ll really make ripples amongst the entrenched.
I like Brian’s analysis of God’s decree of genocide in A Generous Orthodoxy… the diagram helped me immensely. I think that this same thought process might work well to help find common higher ground in the war thing between conservatives and liberals. And this type of thought will tend to unite rather than divide.
Posted by: Vern Hyndman | April 11, 2005 at 10:21 PM
Vern,
As someone who is still exploring emergent and trying to understand what it is, I was struck by your comment that
"We as emergents will need to progress from what we’re not to what we are before we’ll really make ripples amongst the entrenched."
I agree with you. I'm still struggling to find someone who can explain what emergent is. Actually, I can't even find anyone to tell me what emergent isn't.
Posted by: Dignan | April 12, 2005 at 08:14 AM
I am a Minnesotan and I just bloged about McLaren and politics/culture today! I compared him with his antithesis (my opinion of course) Al Mohler.
http://www.ochuk.com/index.php?p=660#comments
Interesting stuff.
Posted by: Ochuk | April 12, 2005 at 11:16 AM
You may not find a concise definition, because as I see it, emergent isn't a concise thing. Some of the best bloggers I've found to be helpful are Will Samson, and this entry by tall skinny kiwi in getting my arms around emergent.
Brian McLaren has been very helpful to me to wrap my mind around things, both as a visitor to his church as well as reading his books. I really recommend a generous orthodoxy as well as a new kind of Christian.
I write this at the risk that your comment was rhetorical... if so, I apologize for missing the point.
Posted by: Vern Hyndman | April 17, 2005 at 09:34 AM