I was just leaving a coffee shop as an undergrad (possibly a second-year?), when a woman approached me outside. At first I couldn't understand what she was saying. In my conversational confusion, I took a moment to survey her and, admittedly, make judgements. Ratty clothes, many bags, tangled hair, dirty and missing teeth. Then I came to; she was asking for money.
I can't remember the specifics of her phrasing or the vernacular she used, aside from the fact that the entire situation seemed all too familiar to her. Bus money- she needed bus money.
I had cash and coins in my wallet. I also had a CTA card in my wallet. Despite this, I lied through my teeth: "I'm sorry, I don't have anything I can give you." With that I turned around, walked back to campus, and hated myself all the way.
Growing up, parents and youth pastors alike had warned me of the dangers of becoming an enabler by giving money to someone who asked. According to my elders, in that particular circumstance the money could have gone to drugs, alcohol, sex ... any number of addictions or unhealthy behaviors that quite probably put the woman in the position to ask for money in the first place.
At the same time, our encounter had been right next to a bus stop. And I had a CTA card at the ready. I also was outside a warm public place on a cold evening- couldn't have I bought her a cup of tea to go along with her bus ride? In every sense, the words I responded with were utterly untrue.
I so wish I had stopped to understand the woman's situation. That I didn't even ask her name is a clear indication of, at the time, how poorly I had internalized God's call to redeem. This was an opportunity to redeem her experience with affluent people, to redeem my experience with those in need, to add another brick to the relational redemption work in our shared city between our two people groups. I did not follow, I did not listen.
Now I refuse to forget this woman. Oftentimes I have returned to that bus stop, hoping to see her again. I never have.
Lord, forgive our grave misunderstanding of your great call toward redemption. You said it perfectly while on the cross: we know not what we do. In your vast mercy, we ask that you might strengthen us to be your hands and your heart in a world of broken relationships. God on High, be near to us and to our family - your family - whom we are constantly meeting and learning more about; and may we in our own brokenness take up your call to redeem, moment by moment. In your gracious and loving name we pray, amen.
Showing posts with label redeem. Show all posts
Showing posts with label redeem. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 25, 2014
Monday, February 17, 2014
On Elizabeth A. Johnson, gays, and the church.
In a country that has historically told a heteronormative narrative, U.S. citizens are rapidly approaching the topic of "gay rights" more and more progressively. However, can one equate legal rights with social acceptance? This writer doesn't think so.
On January 1, 1962, the state of Illinois became the first state in the U.S. to decriminalize homosexuality by repealing its sodomy laws. More than fifty years later, we now see gay marriage legal in 17 states, plus Washington D.C. While these milestones should be recognized in the journey toward legal equality, there is an implicit voice of the marginalized calling out for more work to be done.
While part of this work involves a reorienting of language (from the use of "no homo" by high school boys, to "homosexual lifestyle" by conservative politicians), a reorienting of historical narrative (how many of you have heard of Matthew Shepard's lynching?), and a reorienting of what you, my people, call discrimination, I believe there is a specific, God-ordained work for the church.
Christians in the U.S. attach themselves to arguments and positions across the spectrum of support for the LGBT community and individuals. A Chicago church currently seeks to address what its leadership team has called, "Hospitality and our LGBT Neighbors." The congregation takes part in (nearly) monthly conversation after worship, regarding topics that have included "Reading the Bible with Humility," "Our Behavioral Covenant," and "What is Biblical Hospitality." All these conversations are centered around the idea of how to be hospitable to LGBT members of the congregation, as well as visiting worshipers or families of LGBT individuals.
Elizabeth A. Johnson, Catholic feminist liberation theologian and scholar, would not question the absolute need for the American church to accept the LGBT community, to the point of social and political equality (at the very least).
In her essay "Redeeming the Name of Christ," Johnson discusses the fact that Jesus' male humanness is not indicative of Jesus' divine gender. "In the end," Johnson writes, "from the perspective of Jesus' relationship with divine saving function, gender is not constitutive of the symbol of the Christ. Neither does gender restrict the identity of Christ within human community." If neither sex nor gender restricts the identity of the Christ within human community, it must be assumed that Johnson agrees that other human factors, such as ethnicity, socio-economic status, and, most importantly in this context, sexual orientation, do not restrict the identity of Christ either.
Perhaps it is too often assumed that Jesus the human (whether the distinction between Jesus the human and Jesus the divine can be made is an entirely separate theological debate, which will not be addressed at the moment), along with being white, brown-haired, blue-eyed and English speaking, was also straight. However, whatever Jesus' sexual orientation was during his time in skin, it quite frankly doesn't matter. Because Jesus the human made it quite clear that in his eyes, as well as in the eyes of the Triune God as One, there is no distinction made when it comes to the salvific act of grace and love that is the crucifixion, death and resurrection.
As Johnson makes the argument that the gender of Jesus is irrelevant to the divine salvation given through him, Johnson would also argue that the sexual orientation of Jesus is even more irrelevant to that salvation. Along these lines, Johnson writes that "Jesus' ability to be Savior does not reside in his maleness but in his loving, liberating history lived in the midst of the powers of evil and oppression set loose in the wisdom community by the power of the Spirit to the ends of the earth."
Moving forward from that argument, Johnson makes the case for inclusion of all in Christ, and Christ's inclusion in humans. She cites 1 Corinthians 12 and Galatians 3:28. 1 Corinthians 12 uses the classic Pauline "Body" language, generally summed up in verse 14: "Indeed, the body [of Christ] does not consist of one member but of many" (Holy Bible, NRSV). Galatians 3:28 is also familiar to the practicing Christian: "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus" (Holy Bible, NRSV). The Galatians passage deals with contextual historical divisive human categories of humans. The implicit argument for inclusion of gays in the body of Christ is presented as well. Today, many might argue that Paul would continue with "... there is no longer hetersexual or homosexual, transgender or bisexual ..."
This is not to say that factors innate to personal identity are no longer allowed to be identifying, but rather that these are lost as barriers to entering into the body of Christ. Christ is in all, and all are invited to be in Christ. This invitation to baptism (invitation to body-ness) by a redeemed Christ in an invitation to all. Inclusivity continues to be key for LGBT individuals. Johnson's argument pinpoints imperative elemental aspects of christological doctrine that, at their core, come alongside the suffering and marginalized gay individual to say, "Christ is here, Christ is for you, Christ invites you!" All are invited to this inclusive table, and therefore Christians should be reflecting such an invitation in society. Christians should be making room for the oppressed - for the queers - at every table, be it in state marriage equality legislature, family insurance policies, news headlines, school system curricula, dinner table language, or in the literal church setting.
Johnson writes that the "passion of God is clearly directed toward the lifting of social oppression and the establishing of right relations." If this is truly the passion of God, that there be no social oppression, Christians aught to be at the forefront of the battle for gay rights, for the reorienting of the English language, for pushback against hate crimes. In making this claim, Johnson challenges Christians all over the world to be Christ in their world. This can be done by living the invitational life.
So go, my people, and redeem. Redeem the church - your church - to be inclusive for your gay brothers and sisters. Live the invitational life.
On January 1, 1962, the state of Illinois became the first state in the U.S. to decriminalize homosexuality by repealing its sodomy laws. More than fifty years later, we now see gay marriage legal in 17 states, plus Washington D.C. While these milestones should be recognized in the journey toward legal equality, there is an implicit voice of the marginalized calling out for more work to be done.
While part of this work involves a reorienting of language (from the use of "no homo" by high school boys, to "homosexual lifestyle" by conservative politicians), a reorienting of historical narrative (how many of you have heard of Matthew Shepard's lynching?), and a reorienting of what you, my people, call discrimination, I believe there is a specific, God-ordained work for the church.
Christians in the U.S. attach themselves to arguments and positions across the spectrum of support for the LGBT community and individuals. A Chicago church currently seeks to address what its leadership team has called, "Hospitality and our LGBT Neighbors." The congregation takes part in (nearly) monthly conversation after worship, regarding topics that have included "Reading the Bible with Humility," "Our Behavioral Covenant," and "What is Biblical Hospitality." All these conversations are centered around the idea of how to be hospitable to LGBT members of the congregation, as well as visiting worshipers or families of LGBT individuals.
Elizabeth A. Johnson, Catholic feminist liberation theologian and scholar, would not question the absolute need for the American church to accept the LGBT community, to the point of social and political equality (at the very least).
In her essay "Redeeming the Name of Christ," Johnson discusses the fact that Jesus' male humanness is not indicative of Jesus' divine gender. "In the end," Johnson writes, "from the perspective of Jesus' relationship with divine saving function, gender is not constitutive of the symbol of the Christ. Neither does gender restrict the identity of Christ within human community." If neither sex nor gender restricts the identity of the Christ within human community, it must be assumed that Johnson agrees that other human factors, such as ethnicity, socio-economic status, and, most importantly in this context, sexual orientation, do not restrict the identity of Christ either.
Perhaps it is too often assumed that Jesus the human (whether the distinction between Jesus the human and Jesus the divine can be made is an entirely separate theological debate, which will not be addressed at the moment), along with being white, brown-haired, blue-eyed and English speaking, was also straight. However, whatever Jesus' sexual orientation was during his time in skin, it quite frankly doesn't matter. Because Jesus the human made it quite clear that in his eyes, as well as in the eyes of the Triune God as One, there is no distinction made when it comes to the salvific act of grace and love that is the crucifixion, death and resurrection.
As Johnson makes the argument that the gender of Jesus is irrelevant to the divine salvation given through him, Johnson would also argue that the sexual orientation of Jesus is even more irrelevant to that salvation. Along these lines, Johnson writes that "Jesus' ability to be Savior does not reside in his maleness but in his loving, liberating history lived in the midst of the powers of evil and oppression set loose in the wisdom community by the power of the Spirit to the ends of the earth."
Moving forward from that argument, Johnson makes the case for inclusion of all in Christ, and Christ's inclusion in humans. She cites 1 Corinthians 12 and Galatians 3:28. 1 Corinthians 12 uses the classic Pauline "Body" language, generally summed up in verse 14: "Indeed, the body [of Christ] does not consist of one member but of many" (Holy Bible, NRSV). Galatians 3:28 is also familiar to the practicing Christian: "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus" (Holy Bible, NRSV). The Galatians passage deals with contextual historical divisive human categories of humans. The implicit argument for inclusion of gays in the body of Christ is presented as well. Today, many might argue that Paul would continue with "... there is no longer hetersexual or homosexual, transgender or bisexual ..."
This is not to say that factors innate to personal identity are no longer allowed to be identifying, but rather that these are lost as barriers to entering into the body of Christ. Christ is in all, and all are invited to be in Christ. This invitation to baptism (invitation to body-ness) by a redeemed Christ in an invitation to all. Inclusivity continues to be key for LGBT individuals. Johnson's argument pinpoints imperative elemental aspects of christological doctrine that, at their core, come alongside the suffering and marginalized gay individual to say, "Christ is here, Christ is for you, Christ invites you!" All are invited to this inclusive table, and therefore Christians should be reflecting such an invitation in society. Christians should be making room for the oppressed - for the queers - at every table, be it in state marriage equality legislature, family insurance policies, news headlines, school system curricula, dinner table language, or in the literal church setting.
Johnson writes that the "passion of God is clearly directed toward the lifting of social oppression and the establishing of right relations." If this is truly the passion of God, that there be no social oppression, Christians aught to be at the forefront of the battle for gay rights, for the reorienting of the English language, for pushback against hate crimes. In making this claim, Johnson challenges Christians all over the world to be Christ in their world. This can be done by living the invitational life.
So go, my people, and redeem. Redeem the church - your church - to be inclusive for your gay brothers and sisters. Live the invitational life.
- taken from "Blessed Assurance!" Claire Nelson, 2014.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)