Okay, you can look now. It's done.

[This post is part 3 of a 3 part series. The first post "Don't Look yet... it's not finished" can be found here. The second post "Not yet...still working." can be found here.]

 

Okay, let's get back to the paintings from part 1 of this post. [I hadn't forgotten] As you may recall we had, on the one hand, a successful-fearful work of art—David's "Oath of the Horatii"—and on the other a fruitful-hopeful work of art—Goya's "The Third of May, 1808". With the help of Henri Nouwen we got around to the idea that if a life could be considered a painting it would be desirable for that painting to be a fruitful-hopeful painting, like the Goya, rather than a successful-fearful one, like the David.

WE MAKE MORE THAN PAINTINGS
Now I'd like to broaden our focus from making paintings to making things in general, or as Andy Crouch by way of Borgmann calls it, "making something of the world."1 When we make something of our world we take "this" and "that," effect change somehow and end up with "another thing." In the case of a painting we take this canvas and that paint and we end up with more than the sum of canvas and paint—something new, a painting. We could also take this water and that pile of vegetables and end up with something more than the sum of water and vegetables, we end up with something new—soup. This is the essence of our creative capacity as a reflection of Creator God. We don't create ex nihilo, out of nothing, but we do create new things.

When we make something of our world, the things we make can go one of two ways:

we can

• put ourselves at the centre
• attempt to control out of fear
• spread fear thereby self referentially reinforcing an environment of control
• repeat

OR we can

• die to ourselves out of hope 
• place God's kingdom at the centredie to ourselves out of hope
• spread hope thereby creating new environments conducive to further self giving love
• repeat

 

Okay, but aren't the images I've used a little heavy handed? Well, they are biblical images. They come from Isaiah 2:4

"And they will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks Nation will not lift up sword against nation
And never again will they learn war"

Handgun-like things will be turned into garden-tool-like things. In God's kingdom not only will we make garden tool like things in the first place, but we'll redeem handgun like things and turn them into garden tool like things.

 
WHAT KIND OF SOMETHING DO WE MAKE OF THE WORLD?
What we make of the world, which can tend toward handgun-likeness or garden-tool-likeness, includes not only physical tangible things like soup, chairs, buildings, and paintings. Things we make also includes intangible things, like organizational structures, systems and methods. Even though these aren't things we can see, they are very much things we make.

Churches are things we make too. The building, if there is one, is something we make. The organizational structures, systems and rules of a church are also something we make.

So, as something we make, how do our churches fair when thinking about their handgun-likeness or their garden-tool-likeness? Before we have a look, it's probably wise to state that in the here and now of God's kingdom, in the already-but-not-yet-ness of God's kingdom, nothing will be fully handgun-like or garden-tool-like; they'll fall somewhere on a continuum. There is no such thing as a handgun church or a garden tool church. In the already-but-not-yet-ness of God's kingdom here and now, all churches are both, and even that's an oversimplification. Different parts of components of churches are varying degrees of both. We aren't talking about an actual church here, we're talking about a lens through which we can look at our actual church in order to ask ourselves, "Are we quietly leaning this way?" They are pretty drastic images, but it's their concrete clarity that makes them a handy tool for thinking about the things we make.
 
HANDGUN CHURCH
A handgun church doesn't go around shooting people. It is very civilized and respectable. But the handgun church lets people know in no uncertain terms, we're packing heat. The bullet of eternal damnation is in the chamber and we're not afraid to use it, so you'd better sign up for our moral program before it's too late or there'll be hell to pay, literally.

In a handgun church the word "growth" becomes about numerical growth because handguns are only concerned with coerced vs not-coerced, in or out, yes or no. Handguns aren't very good with the process of growth. So questions asked in a handgun church tend to be framed around numerical growth. How many people have we attracted, convinced (coerced?); how many in, how many out, how many yes, how many no? Numerical "growth," or successfulness, is the natural outcome of strength and control. Strength and control talk leads to generative action undergirded by strength and control. Generative action undergirded by strength and control leads inevitably to injustice. Injustice is neglect in public. Injustice looks like a) ugliness (things out of right-relationship), b) slavery (things enslaved to being out of right-relationship).

GARDEN TOOL CHURCH
A garden tool church is on it's knees and getting its hands dirty, so it might not look respectable. The garden tool church lets people know, our master didn't pack heat, so we aren't packing heat. We left the gun at home.

In a garden tool church growth is about a seed dying and becoming a shoot, which in turn becomes a fledging plant, which in turn starts to bear fruit. It's about the process of growth which begins now and continues until God's kingdom has arrived in full. It's about a mystery that can't be controlled or turned into successful programs. Mysterious fruitfulness is the natural outcome of vulnerable and hopeful talk. Vulnerable and hopeful talk leads to generative action undergirded by vulnerability and hope. Generative action undergirded by vulnerability and hope leads inevitably to justice. Justice is love in public.2 Justice looks like a) beauty (things in right-relationship & things enjoying right-relationship; b) freedom (things enjoying right-relationship & things in right-relationship).

We can't use handguns in a kingdom where handguns are anathema, we can't use weaponized systems in a garden-tool kingdom, we can't talk about plant like growth with a gun in our hands, but that hasn't stopped us trying.

As a gathering of Jesus' disciples which does our gathering more closely resemble?

Handgun church? Fearful propaganda that upholds the status quo through strength, control and success?

Or

Garden tool church? Hopeful imagining that subverts status quo through weakness, vulnerability and fruitfulness?

If the life of our church is a painting, what would the painting look like? Would it be a handgun painting or a garden tool painting?

1. "Culture Making," Andy Crouch,

2. "Justice is love in public." Dr. Cornell West. here [http://youtu.be/783fMZeG8Ac]

Posted via email from The Broken Wing

Not yet... still working.

[This post is part 2 of a 3 part series. The first post "Don't Look yet... it's not finished" can be found here. Look for the third post shortly.]

A lot of a handgun's power lies in its potential use. The idea of of the handgun is usually enough to get most people to do what you want.

Can you imagine Jesus packing heat? Can you see him walking around Galilee with a side arm? I can't. I can't imagine him literally packing heat, and I can't imagine him metaphorically packing heat. I can't imagine him saying "Love me. Or else."

Rome was about packing heat though. Top to bottom, the entire empire was based on military power: the ability to fight, the ability to kill, the ability to take one's affairs into one's own hands—preferably by force.

A lot of Rome's power lay in it's potential action. The idea of Rome was pretty coercive, particularly among defeated and occupied countries bearing fresh scars and thus fresh reminders of the actual violence which lay behind the potential violence.

The civilized threat of violence in order to enact civil coercion and therefore civil security was the essence of civilization. Civilized and good people engaged in that comfortably familiar oxymoron—enforcing peace.

Of course soldiers enforced peace by brandishing swords—which were a lot like handguns. Soldiers with swords overtly brandished the idea of Rome. That was a pretty obvious way to enforce peace. But more prevalent than obvious swords were subtle things, things which upheld the legitimacy of Rome as the bearer of the idea of Rome. Things like banners, monuments, ornaments, emblems, uniforms, documents, seals, certificates, systems, methods, that kind of thing. Emblems upheld the legitimacy of Rome to be the bearer of potential violence for the sake of civilized peace. Emblems alluded to the idea of Rome which in turn alluded to actual violence. Said one more way, emblems alluded to Rome's right to allude the potential violence which in turn alluded to Rome's right to enact actual violence. The emblem was twice removed from actual violence, so it was all very civilized and acceptable.

What made it civilized and acceptable was precisely the fact that you didn't have to go around shooting a lot of people, you just had to subtly remind people that you could potentially shoot them. Metaphorical handguns are the same as real handguns in that a lot of their power lies in their potential use.

So, if you were a Roman citizen you were packing heat. You had access to the power of Rome. Solely by virtue of being a Roman citizen your hand was casually resting on the cold metal strapped to your hip, your thumb on the hammer and your index finger twitching. The idea of you drawing on the idea of Rome was a powerful idea.

If you weren't a Roman citizen you were't packing heat. You knew you weren't, and everybody else knew you weren't. That also was a powerful idea.

However, the emblem, as much as the sword, enforced peace. Coercing people with emblems and ornaments that are metaphorical handguns, despite its outward civilized nature, is still violent coercion. Using actual force to enlist compliance is pretty easy to spot. It's violence against personhood via the body, a body we can see, so we easily see the violence. Using the threat of force to enlist compliance is much harder to spot. It's violence against personhood via the spirit, a spirit we can't see, so we don't easily see that kind of violence.

But an attack on human spirit is just as violent as an attack on human bodies, maybe more so for its subtle and insidious nature. An attack on human spirit kills in slow motion through the quiet violence of neglect.

Can you imagine the subtly of social interaction required of a non-Roman citizen when conversing with a Roman citizen? Whatever words came out of the mouth of the Roman citizen, behind those words was the tacit statement made by his emblems, ornaments, systems and documents, "Remember, I can unleash swift and horrible violence on whom I chose for reasons I chose." How would those conversations go? How would they be skewed? How would the conversation be different if the Roman citizen chose to leave the emblems and ornaments at home, in effect, leave his handgun at home?

Then Jesus shows up, right smack in the middle of a culture marinated in the idea of packing heat. God comes present to his creation right in the middle of an Empire that expanded itself by attacking human bodies and sustained itself by attacking human spirits. And how does The One whose power extends over everything1 chose to live?

He refuses to pack heat.

His power extends over everything, but he will not use his legitimate power for the purpose of coercion. Not against the Romans on behalf of the Jews. Not against the religious elite on behalf of his Father. Not against the rich on behalf of the poor. He sometimes acted with passion, but he didn't gloweringly hover over anyone threatening annihilation. Jesus didn't once use his power to coerce anyone, ever.

God, in coming present to his creation in the person of Jesus, in living as self-pouring-out-love in a world of self-preserving-violent-coercion, stated definitively "I am not packing heat. I will not put one in the chamber, put the gun to your head and tell you to love me. As a matter of fact, I'm putting the gun down. Actually, you know what, I haven't even brought it with me."

The tone of the conversation changes considerably when the God of the Universe leaves his handgun at home.

1"his power extends over everything" taken from Colossians 2:10 The Message

Posted via email from The Broken Wing