Shane Claiborne-Part 3

Although I’ve been giving Shane Claiborne a lot of props for exposing the idols of patriotism and consumerism, I need to shift our attention to a few of his views that have dire theological consequences, primarily centering on his sacramental view of the “least of these.” Taken from the Sheep and Goats passage of Matthew 25, according to this interpretation, not only does Jesus incarnate himself in the poor, but also that his presence within them should act as a motivation for Christians to serve the underprivileged throughout the world because we are in essence serving the mystical presence of our Lord Jesus. It is not surprising that he passionately holds this belief since his two mentors, the late Mother Teresa and Tony Campolo, propagate this view throughout their speeches and writings. While Mother Teresa was alive, she insisted on the belief that the dying, cripple, unwanted and unloved are actually “Jesus” in disguise. Tony Campolo has even called for evangelicals “to develop a theology that Jesus is waiting to be encountered in the poor and the oppressed.”

Consequently, many of my (evangelical) urban ministry colleagues have answered this call because of their sacramental view, including the influential, simple-way voice of Shane Claiborne. Throughout his book Irresistible Revolution, Shane shares stories of God’s grace and mystery when serving the poor, whom he assumed was Jesus. At times, he interchanges the phrase “God’s image in the poor” to communicate the same idea. The phrase “God’s image,” can be a much better term with one major distinction. That is, the image of God in humans was severely broken by the fall, whereas Jesus Christ embodies the perfect image of God because he is God-in-the-flesh. However, because all of us humans possess a depraved, sin nature and Jesus does not, we cannot claim that the presence of Jesus somehow dwells in the poor (or all human beings), unless they have repented and believed the gospel.

Let me share a few stories that might shine some light on this issue. Over three years ago, while driving through my neighborhood, as I paused for a stop sign, a young drug-dealing “thug” on the corner pulled out his gun with a laser scope, and aimed its red dot at my forehead. With a pull of his trigger I would’ve been a dead man, but out of sheer terror my body jolted with fear, which caused him to double up with laughter allowing me to drive away. The man with the gun was not a high-level pusher we see in movies or music videos with flashy clothes, a hummer, a “crib” mansion, and an assortment of scantily clad women by his side. Rather, he was like many other young adult men in our community: jobless, desperate, a high school drop out lacking marketable skills, and most likely addicted to the substance that he was selling. In other words, he also fit the description of being poor. So that begs the question, if, as Shane Claiborne insists, the presence of Jesus mystically resides in the poor, was this drug-dealer, who threatened my life, actually Jesus in disguise? Would Jesus have terrorized me in this manner and then mocked my fearful response?

Here’s another scenario. Fifteen years ago when I was the live-in manager at a transitional homeless shelter for men, I spent some of my time connecting with homeless people living under freeway overpasses, in refrigerator boxes, and along the river. While the homeless population, especially those who are mentally ill, are most vulnerable to physical assaults on the streets, much of the public do not realize that it often occurs by the hands of other homeless individuals. Not only were several of my homeless friends victimized by other homeless people, but also I remember helping break up a fight where one street person was beating another street person half-to-death. Here’s the million dollar question. If the mystical presence of Jesus somehow resides in the least of these, was Jesus as a homeless person actually physically assaulting and beating Jesus as the other homeless person? If we believe the nice “least of these” to be Jesus, shouldn’t we believe the nasty “least of these” to be Jesus as well?

Let’s be honest with ourselves and the Biblical narrative. Sin despoiled all people and all creation, including the poor. Unfortunately, those holding to the sacramental view tend to overlook the sin nature within the “least of these.” Yes, they are vulnerable and victimized. Yes, they often have been and continue to be sinned against. Yet like the rich, the middle-class, or any other human being (however they are classified by the world), at the core of who they are, is a selfish, rebellious sin problem. When we view the least of these as the mystical presence of Jesus, we often come away with a delusional, romanticizing outlook of the poor and oppressed.

For the sacramental view of the poor to coincide with orthodoxy, the Campolos and Claibornes ought to address (from the entire Biblical story, not just the red letters) how Christ can somehow mystically reside in the unregenerate poor, especially those who are downright evil. If they don’t, their other alternative might be to swim among the murky waters of universalism.

Dr. Grier

Since I am somewhat ADD with my thought processes, if I am doing a series on a subject, that does not mean that I can't interrupt it to post something different-like putting on hold my Shane Claiborne series to blog about something else. Although I represented UTM at a ministry conference yesterday, more importantly I had the chance to reconnect with one of my former profs from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary (also the former dean of the seminary as well), Dr. James M. Grier. He's been retired for some time now, but maintains a rigorous preaching and teaching schedule throughout the world.

I attended the two workshops that he taught, both of which intersected with post-modern thought and the emergent church. The first one, Certainty about Uncertainty, dealt with the ongoing conflict in Evangelical circles about the certainty, assurance, and confidence of truth. Dr. Grier has a unique gift of rising above all the noise of the debate, pointing out both the veracity and the errors that each side is making, and then presenting the orthodox position with a fresh new viewpoint. In this presentation, he tore down the modern idols of rationalism and empiricism that permeate Foundationalism, but steered away from replacing them with the post-modern idols of social relativism and pluralism, which regrettably, many emergents have allowed to seep into their epistemology. Even as Dr. Grier pecked away at more of the enlightenment's cancerous influences of the late 20th century and early 21st century (non-emergent) evangelical church, he makes clear God's self-disclosure as through nature, the scriptures, and the incarnate Son, Jesus Christ. In fact, he makes Scripture the central aspect of our Epistemology and ultimate standard of truth demonstrating how it can interpret and give significance to all of reality around us. If you are interested in hearing a longer, drawn out version of this presentation, download it from his website. jamesmgrier.org

His second presentation, The Missional Church, really stepped on some toes. Since much of the emergent church has been associated with the term missional, he begins by identifying several characteristics of the emergent church, taken from Bolger and Gibbs book, Emerging churches. As he walked through these characteristics of the emergent church, he took aim at some of the sacred cows that exist in the typical evangelical church of today. For instance, while describing the characteristic, transforming secular space, Grier bemoans the fact that churches throughout North America have locked their resources into building programs and buildings that they use only a couple times a week. However, by transforming secular space, emergent churches free up more resources for the kingdom. At the same time, he feels that much of the emergent church has capitulated itself to post-modern culture, which is just as wrong. Instead, he proposes the church as an alternative community living out Missio Dei as a sign, instrument and foretaste of the kingdom of God.

Interestingly enough, Dr. Grier exposed the same idols as Shane Claiborne when explaining the church as an alternative community. With indignant disgust, he exhorted our group to get the American flag off the platform and out of the church so that people don't confuse kingdoms. He also exposed the idol of consumerism, including a modern day story of the rich young ruler. A man requested Dr. Grier as an accountability partner in the areas of purity, marriage, and devotions. Dr. Grier responded by asking to trade 1040 tax forms and the man retorted that his finances was his private business and thus withdrew his request of accountability.

Finally as Dr. Grier fleshed out a kingdom theology of the church, he took the evangelical church to task for their lack of commitment to God's mission in our nation's urban centers. Of course I was shouting Amens to that until the people around me gave me more than a few dirty looks.

Thank you Dr. Grier for continuing to articulate a scholarly, Biblical theology of these different issues in such a way that refuses to bow down to either the modern idols nor the post-modern idols.

Shane Claiborne-Part I

During the fall of 2006, I was introduced to the writing of Shane Claiborne through his book, “Irresistible Revolution.” As I scrutinized the ideas behind his story, I found myself at times shouting “Amen and Halleluiah” at the top of my lungs in agreement, while other times I was throwing it against the wall, voicing my opposition. Even though irresistible revolution generated such conflicting responses within me, I am convinced that its story and message needs sharing with the evangelical church-at-large through out America. I will begin by pointing out areas where I believe Shane Claiborne is right.

First, he exposes the idol of patriotism. By sharing experiences spanning the globe (from evangelical churches in America to the cities and churches in the war zone of Iraq), Shane brings to light how our recent misplaced allegiance to country, especially during war, has harmed the reputation of Christ and his church. While I am at odds with his pacifistic stance, he does make a compelling argument. Christian evangelicals allowed patriotism during our nation’s crisis to shape our worldview rather than a seeking a Biblical view of social-political issues (such as war) that centers on the person and work of Jesus Christ. Much has been made of how the evangelical church as a whole in America wholeheartedly supported the recent invasion of Iraq and to "stay the course." Perhaps our devotion to the interests and values of our country played a part in diverting our attention from objectively viewing the war from a Biblical and Christological lens.

I know I am guilty as charged. For instance, right after 9-11, I proudly displayed a “Go get’em George!” bumper sticker on the back of our family’s mini-van. In response to the terror attacks, I was ready to support any action the president made, even if the end justified the means. However, once we invaded Iraq, I realized I needed to develop a theology of war because several of my students were questioning its biblical rationale. In my study, I not only examined the scriptures, but I also read Yoder’s “the Politics of Jesus,” which argues for the pacifist position. Yet I did not stop there. I delved into Darrell Cole’s recent defense of just-war theory, “When God says War is Right,” and then unpacked “War and Christian Ethics: classic readings on the morality of War,” which highlights two-thousand years of writings from philosophers and theologians pertaining to war. Although in the end, I do hold to a just-war position, I am convinced that certain aspects of the current Iraqi conflict cannot be justified by just-war theory (torture, pre-emptive strike, etc…). At the same time, certain aspects of the war could coincide with a just-war position, such as the liberation of a severely oppressed people. However, it is suspect…because only when our government could not find weapons of mass destruction that they began to articulate a “liberation” rationalization for the war.

Regardless of your position whether you support the current Iraqi conflict or not, what makes Shane Claiborne’s message significant and right about the idolatry of patriotism is that he compels Christians to question where their loyalty and allegiance ultimately lies. May it always be with our Lord Jesus Christ.

Why I am blogging about Shane Claiborne

I had a great mini-vacation with my family and our very good friends, the Vanderkolks. We spent most of our time at Ludington’s Best Western Hotel relaxing around the pool, waterslide and hot tub. As I mentioned before, my goal over this break was to read Walker Wink’s “Powers” trilogy. I read Engaging the Powers and sparsely read Naming the Powers and Unmasking the Powers. The books were stimulating, but it was like eating a whole chicken. There were a lot of bones to spit out in order to get to the meat. I spent much of my time having to sort out his liberal assumptions before I could really take in a few of the good points that he makes. To sum it up, these books really didn’t help me as much as I’d hoped in understanding Shane Claiborne’s beliefs, but they did help me understand where he got some of his practical ideas in responding to violence non-violently.

After taking some good advise from Sherilyn (my wife), I need to clarify why I am even spending time blogging about Shane Claiborne. For the record, UTM sentiments is not a “gossip” blog where people pool their ignorance in order to form some sort of united consensus of criticism. Unfortunately, the Cedarville cancellation due to the buzz from the “angry bloggers” put Shane Claiborne in a negative limelight, where he took some unfair shots from his critics (slanting the truth, pronouncing him guilty-by-association, conveniently leaving out certain facts, etc…).

My purpose for writing has more to do with clearing up the fog concerning his worldview so that fundamental and evangelical churches are neither labeling him as a heretic nor remaining in the dark about some of his beliefs that are outside the realm of evangelical theology. Since Shane Claiborne’s influence among the younger evangelical world has exploded due to the success of his book. irresistible revolution, and the fact that he is in constant demand speaking about urban ministry and social justice issues at churches and college campuses all over North America, it is natural to engage into a conversation about his worldview on UTM Sentiments. In my coming blogs, I will explain where I believe Shane Claiborne is right, where I believe he is wrong, and where I believe he is partly right.

The Drama of Cedarville, Shane Claiborne, and the "angry" bloggers

I am feeling sorry for Cedarville U. these days. In response to a swell of pressure from concerned parents, alumni, and bloggers, Shane Claiborne’s February 11th lecture to the students of Cedarville was canceled. According to Dr. Carl Ruby, “There was a tension between my desire to use this even to challenge students to take a closer look at a very important social issue, and the need to protect Cedarville’s reputation as a conservative, Christ centered university. There can’t be any confusion about our commitment to God’s Word and our historically conservative doctrinal position.” You can read more about it on this link to Christianity Today.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/februaryweb-only/107-22.0.html

From the blogger’s viewpoint, bringing Shane Claiborne to speak before the student body is unthinkable because his theology and leftist politics embodies the emergent liberal. In their mind, Shane’s conversations will only lead Cedarville students away from orthodox Christianity because they assume that the majority of them are not grounded in sound doctrine. Here is a typical blogger who apposed Shane Claiborne’s visit to Cedarville.

http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/?=cedarville

Reflecting on the Cedarville incident, Shane Claiborne blogged to the world that Christians should not fear disagreements, and invited the bloggers to have a public conversation, and share a meal or even communion together.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/godspolitics/2008/02/dont-fear-disagreement-by-shan.html

For the record, I do have some serious disagreements with some of Shane Claiborne’s theology, but I am going to side with him on this one. University students should be exposed to different faith perspectives than their own, especially since Cedarville concentrates a great deal of attention helping their students form a Christian world and life view, which in turn helps them discern truth from error. Then again, over the past few years, Cedarville has had a public relations nightmare such as the GARBC vote to disassociate itself from the university over its relationship with Ohio Southern Baptists as well as the controversy in its Philosophy and Bible department over the certainty of truth vs. assurance of truth.

Maybe the best way to handle a “controversial figure” like Shane Claiborne without appearing to compromise their historical doctrinal position would have been to invite Shane as part of a forum to discuss social issues that affect urban ministry. Include a few more urban ministry leaders that are more conservative in their theology, but who are as passionate about evangelism and social justice as Shane is. Let’s have a real “conversation” where we evangelicals, who hold to differing viewpoints, can actually talk to and with each other, rather than talking past each other.

At least Dr. Ruby didn’t get fired. In the early 1980’s, Grand Rapids Baptist College (now Cornerstone U) invited Tony Campolo for their Staley lecture series, but because of the public outcry from certain fundamentalist pastors, uninvited him and then fired the Dr. Veldt, who was responsible for the invitation.