- Community as an ideal is best expressed in the relationship of the Trinity. The definition of an ideal community is persons in right relationship. There is Unity, Order, Harmony, and Fellowship within the Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They are of one mind. Each member plays his role perfectly. Each person is unique. Interaction is at its fullest potential.
If our community is to reflect God's community, we must be in right relationship to one another. We must be of one mind, playing our unique roles and interacting with one another to our fullest potential.
This ideal is an impossible feat to reach, but is helpful for casting a vision to work toward. The ideal community is a noun, but what we do to get there is more like a verb. This group exists to try and discover by study, conversation, and experience what we can do to attempt to reach such lofty heights.
We know that we will fall short, and we rest in the provision of our Messiah, the Lamb upon whose righteousness we rest our hope. However, we are compelled by Paul in Romans 6 not to cheapen grace by leaning on it more than we must. So we are attempting to "do community" so that we might learn how to be in perfect community with God and mankind, which is the full extent of the law and the prophets; what Israel has called "The Great Shema" (Deuteronomy 6, Matthew 22:36-40).
As we deepen our relationships, we ascend to the heights of community. This is not an unending cycle, but rather a staircase to fixed destination.
In order to interact with another person, we must have a commitment to do so. A commitment toward one thing is always in exclusion of something else. This often causes a conflict of some kind, because of an infringement upon percieved rights. For example, if I make a commitment to a poker night, this excludes my wife from spending time with me. If she has a percieved right to time with me, then we are in conflict. Peace will only occur with the surrendering of rights. Both sides must be in agreement before the conflict is resolved. Peaceful resolution of a conflict occurrs only when one or both sides surrender freely to the percieved rights of the other party. With peace comes trust. If there is no percieved threat upon my rights, I trust you not to harm me. If I trust you not to harm me, I will lower my defenses. This is called vulnerability, from the latin vulnaire (to wound). When we are vulnerable, we are able to be wounded, but we are also able to interact at a deeper level of intimacy. Intimacy creates an even deeper commitment, and we move closer toward interaction at our fullest potential. If at any point the cycle is broken, we return to conflict. Failure to peaceably resolve conflict and interact will always result in further conflict and will never deepen a relationship.
It has been suggested that two "kindred spirits" could interact at ever-deepening levels without conflict. In theory this is true. That is the nature of the ideal community, The Trinity. The nature of the open interaction, complete surrender, and infinite harmony do give Him/Them a conflictless rleationship. But they do not reach perfect interaction. They/He is/are perfect from eternality. There is therefore no ever-deepening level of love even with Him/Them. We are only deceiving ourselves if we believe we fallen men will reach our fullest potential for relationship with other fallen men without conflict. Possible? Maybe. Likely? No.
When the Lawyer asked who his neighbor was, the Teacher reversed the question and asked who he was a neighbor to. This is the first step. Community cannot be self-centered. Community is not about meeting your need to belong. It's about belonging to the needs of others.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Monday, September 1, 2008
Disorganized Thoughts on on American/Christian Dual Citizenship
In a representative democracy, it is the duty of the citizen to cast a single vote for the ruler or law which best aligns with his ideal so that the citizen's interests may be represented accurately.
A Christian is to have no interests but those of Christ.
Christs interests are based on integrity; not utility.
We must not, therefore, vote strategically or in a reactionary spirit.
We must therefore vote with integrity for people of integrity.
It seems to me that partisan voting is rarely if ever integral to our ideals. It's always either settling for the lesser of two evils or trying to keep the other guy out of office. Both are utilitarian. I am suggesting write-in voting. I realize that this will likely lead to the "axis of evil" winning if the Christians stop uniting under the "lesser evil," but Christianity is about rightousness, not power. We can't control the government by force and say we're following Christ. We must woo them by our love. When the church behaves with integrity, there will be revival in our land.
Righteousness is always ultimately pragmatic, however, pragmatism as an end is never righteous. God is sovereign, and He has soveregnly declared the way we should behave. His grace in and to this country is no excuse to sin all the more (Romans 6). It's almost never a matter of "controlling the country," but more often a case of "I couldn't bear to think that I could have helped to stop this man from getting into office with my vote." Mostly our struggle with power is more about trying to keep from feeling helpless than it is about trying to take over. We're just afraid of getting squished.
I would recommend writing in Jesus at this point. Since I don't have a firm commitment to these ideas as self-evident truths, I feel free to be flippant about them. I'll probably end up voting for the lesser evil too. But I'm not sure I'm committed to that. Still processing.
John Wooden said it this way: getting into politics is like getting into football strategy: You have to be smart enough to understand it and dumb enough to think it matters.
US Politics is an intricate system, and in order to engage it, you must buy into three presuppositions: 1.) That your vote counts, 2.) That voting is a good, 3.) That the outcome of the election has any bearing on real (read: one's private experience of) life.
1.) I don't know whether our votes matter or not. You could try to prove it to me, but it will be like the time my dad tried to explain the way a TV works. I'm too dumb to get it and I'd prefer to think of it as magic anyway.
2.) I think voting is a good. I think it's important to align oneself officially with ones opinion. I think there's integrity in putting your money on your face, because that's where your mouth is.
Because of the logical combination of the first two, it's easy to see that for me, voting on a philosophical level is more about doing the right thing than participating in effecting a cause. If something changes due to my vote, that's fine, but it's not why I do it. I'm called upon by my country to vote, and this patriotic duty is not in opposition to my spiritual duty, so I am compelled to comply.
3.) Here's where it gets tricky. Up until this point, I'd probably either not vote, or write in Jesus. These options seem absurd to you and me both for this reason: fear. It seems unreasonable to us to give up what little control we are supposed to have in this crazy powerful system. "We can stop the fatal bullet!" cries Jon Vowell, "Forget about the non-mortal wounds!" And we all rally beneath that. It's noble. However, it requires our belief that our pesonal experience will be affected.
"I couldn't bear to see that guy die, so I'll save him." It comes back to self interest.
Follow me here:
I will vote for John McCain, not because I believe in him or because I think Obama is the devil, but simply because (I'm with Jon here) he's the lesser of the two.
But I'm only there because I don't have the faith to do what I actually think is right. I won't feel noble when I'm casting my vote. I'll feel afraid not to vote. It's the thought that something COULD be different, but I don't want to be the guy who stood up for it, because I really don't believe I have any power that my government hasn't given me. If I did, I would try to use the system to beat the system.
Modern America is so fundamentally flawed, that you can't actually feel good about your vote. This is more like spending the night at your crazy Uncle Sam's house and having to choose between cold spam and soy burgers for dinner. Forget how it could be, folks. Dad's not coming to pick you up til tomorrow. Tonight, we dine in Hell.
What we need to do is vote for the lesser evil that actually has a chance at winning, all the while preparing the way for the real messiah. Obey Uncle Sam. He's not a good parent, but he's not supposed to be. He's a reminder to be in the world and not of it. To cast your vote on election days and to be crucified with Christ on every day, preparing the world for His redemption with His love. We have a Father who's coming back to get us. Let's fix our eyes on Him. Let's campaign for Him. Let's widen our focus to the big picture.
A Christian is to have no interests but those of Christ.
Christs interests are based on integrity; not utility.
We must not, therefore, vote strategically or in a reactionary spirit.
We must therefore vote with integrity for people of integrity.
It seems to me that partisan voting is rarely if ever integral to our ideals. It's always either settling for the lesser of two evils or trying to keep the other guy out of office. Both are utilitarian. I am suggesting write-in voting. I realize that this will likely lead to the "axis of evil" winning if the Christians stop uniting under the "lesser evil," but Christianity is about rightousness, not power. We can't control the government by force and say we're following Christ. We must woo them by our love. When the church behaves with integrity, there will be revival in our land.
Righteousness is always ultimately pragmatic, however, pragmatism as an end is never righteous. God is sovereign, and He has soveregnly declared the way we should behave. His grace in and to this country is no excuse to sin all the more (Romans 6). It's almost never a matter of "controlling the country," but more often a case of "I couldn't bear to think that I could have helped to stop this man from getting into office with my vote." Mostly our struggle with power is more about trying to keep from feeling helpless than it is about trying to take over. We're just afraid of getting squished.
I would recommend writing in Jesus at this point. Since I don't have a firm commitment to these ideas as self-evident truths, I feel free to be flippant about them. I'll probably end up voting for the lesser evil too. But I'm not sure I'm committed to that. Still processing.
John Wooden said it this way: getting into politics is like getting into football strategy: You have to be smart enough to understand it and dumb enough to think it matters.
US Politics is an intricate system, and in order to engage it, you must buy into three presuppositions: 1.) That your vote counts, 2.) That voting is a good, 3.) That the outcome of the election has any bearing on real (read: one's private experience of) life.
1.) I don't know whether our votes matter or not. You could try to prove it to me, but it will be like the time my dad tried to explain the way a TV works. I'm too dumb to get it and I'd prefer to think of it as magic anyway.
2.) I think voting is a good. I think it's important to align oneself officially with ones opinion. I think there's integrity in putting your money on your face, because that's where your mouth is.
Because of the logical combination of the first two, it's easy to see that for me, voting on a philosophical level is more about doing the right thing than participating in effecting a cause. If something changes due to my vote, that's fine, but it's not why I do it. I'm called upon by my country to vote, and this patriotic duty is not in opposition to my spiritual duty, so I am compelled to comply.
3.) Here's where it gets tricky. Up until this point, I'd probably either not vote, or write in Jesus. These options seem absurd to you and me both for this reason: fear. It seems unreasonable to us to give up what little control we are supposed to have in this crazy powerful system. "We can stop the fatal bullet!" cries Jon Vowell, "Forget about the non-mortal wounds!" And we all rally beneath that. It's noble. However, it requires our belief that our pesonal experience will be affected.
"I couldn't bear to see that guy die, so I'll save him." It comes back to self interest.
Follow me here:
I will vote for John McCain, not because I believe in him or because I think Obama is the devil, but simply because (I'm with Jon here) he's the lesser of the two.
But I'm only there because I don't have the faith to do what I actually think is right. I won't feel noble when I'm casting my vote. I'll feel afraid not to vote. It's the thought that something COULD be different, but I don't want to be the guy who stood up for it, because I really don't believe I have any power that my government hasn't given me. If I did, I would try to use the system to beat the system.
Modern America is so fundamentally flawed, that you can't actually feel good about your vote. This is more like spending the night at your crazy Uncle Sam's house and having to choose between cold spam and soy burgers for dinner. Forget how it could be, folks. Dad's not coming to pick you up til tomorrow. Tonight, we dine in Hell.
What we need to do is vote for the lesser evil that actually has a chance at winning, all the while preparing the way for the real messiah. Obey Uncle Sam. He's not a good parent, but he's not supposed to be. He's a reminder to be in the world and not of it. To cast your vote on election days and to be crucified with Christ on every day, preparing the world for His redemption with His love. We have a Father who's coming back to get us. Let's fix our eyes on Him. Let's campaign for Him. Let's widen our focus to the big picture.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)