Clarion: Journal of Spirituality and Justice

Review of C. Norman Kraus's 'On Being Human: Sexual Orientation and the Image of God' - by Wayne Northey

Book Review of: On Being Human: Sexual Orientation and the Image of God, C. Norman Kraus, Eugene: Cascade Books, 2011, 113 pp. By Wayne Northey 

Since receipt of this publication for review, same-sex marriage has been legalized in the United States. Canada had legalized same-sex marriage in 2005. Since, in both countries, the sky has not fallen… 

Nonetheless, I approach reviewing this book with hesitation and trepidation. Same-sex marriage is still hugely contested in most church denominations. 

C. Norman Kraus enters this discussion as an octogenarian, who, in his Mennonite denomination, is well aware of the minority position he takes. 

He invited fellow octogenarian and pastor Martin Lehman to write the Foreword. It states: 

Simply put, Kraus presents a case for the view that sexual orientation is an essential part of being human; that a human is not responsible for his or her sexual orientation; that homosexual identity is no more perverse than heterosexual identity, and [Christian] guidelines for both homo-erotic and hetero-erotic behaviours should be identical (p. viii). 

I have both appreciated anything I’ve read in the past by the author, and I confess at the outset to find Kraus’ book compelling. For Kraus, indicates Lehman, there is an ecclesial concern related to mission and more specifically evangelism. In the church’s opposition to same-sex relationships, its “saving message is weakened and made less believable by excluding gay believers (p. ix)”, contends Lehman. The rejoinder of course, is that gays and lesbians are not excluded from the church, rather same-sex relations are. But gays and lesbians tell a different real-life story. 

If the church fails in heeding Kraus’ message, Lehman contends that 

those who need Jesus may not believe him, the Holy Spirit will be grieved, the church’s growth as a community of grace, joy, and peace will be slowed, and the flow of healing and hope from the church to the world will be restricted. 

Lehman adds, “This sounds harsh, but it must be said (p. ix).” 

I read recently a restatement by one church body of its opposition to same-sex marriage, in the context of the June 2015 court decision to permit same-sex marriage across the United States. It was compassionate, non-reactionary, and based the opposition on the analogy of Christ and the church in covenant relationship. In that statement, the church had to be “female” in order for the analogy to work. 

Download Full Book Review of On Being Human

The Greatest Commandment - Sermon by Laura Urista

I've always liked to watch detective shows. Growing up, two of my favorite detective shows were Columbo and Dragnet. Remember Sergeant Joe Friday of Dragnet? Sometimes when Sergeant Friday would interview a witness they'd get a little long winded or off topic. Sometimes they would give their own ideas about how to solve the crime. When that happened, Sergeant Friday would say in a very calm, monotone, no-nonsense voice: “Just the facts…just the facts.” In fact, that quote became such a popular catch-phrase or slogan that they started to sell T-shirts with the slogan “Just the Facts.”

In Matthew we read about a Pharisee, described as “an expert in the law,” who asked Jesus what we might call a “Joe Friday—just-the-facts” kind of question.

Matthew 22: 34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
 
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[ Deut. 6:5] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[Lev. 19:18] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” 

Looking back now, from our 21^stcentury vantage point, we understand that when Jesus refers here to “all the law and the Prophets” he was describing the Scripture or Bible known to the Jews of that day…kind of like saying from “A to Z.” Because of course the New Testament was not written yet. SO Jesus’ answer boils down the entire Bible known to the people of that day to just two points.

Two points with a common theme: The great command to love—and not just any kind of love—Godly love.

Home Alone

For those of you who are parents, have you ever left your kid “home alone”?  I don’t mean on accident, like what happened to Kevin McCalister in the movie, but when they were old enough and mature enough to be left home overnight or for a weekend. Maybe in their mid or late teens. I remember the first time we left our son and daughter home alone while my husband, Juan, and I went away for a weekend. I made a list of the most important things they needed to know while we were away. Besides the phone numbers of where we were staying, or neighbors & friends phone numbers, I listed things like where our important papers were located and what to do just in case something happened to us.

The book of John chapter 13 records what I find an interesting statement by Jesus about what he wanted his disciples to know before he left them physically.

In John 13:33-35 Jesus said to his disciples:

33 “Little children, I shall be with you a little while longer…
34 A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” 

      Jesus said these words during the middle of the Passover service, right after Judas had departed. He had just performed the foot-washing and passed the bread and the cup instituting a new way of keeping Passover – which we now know as the Lord’s Supper or Eucharist. Here was Jesus knowing that in just a few hours he’d be facing a terrible beating, and the most humiliating and an excruciatingly slow, painful death.  So what did Jesus feel compelled to tell his disciples at that particular time? What was the crucial, important thing—the NEW commandment he wanted them to remember?  What was the SIGN he gave so everyone would recognize his followers and disciples?

Click here to download the full sermon: The Greatest Commandment

Warriors and Martyrs - Short story by Azariah France-Williams

Azariah France-Williams

Warriors and Martyrs

School playground circa 1982 two seven year old boys are locked in mortal combat. We join them as the taller boy seizes the L shaped branch and with it the advantage

"Pe-ow! Pe-OW! PE-OW! You're dead, ha-ha-ha."

I'm not laughing. I am the short one, the constantly snotty one with a slight asthmatic wheeze. I am a bit put out that I've been downed again. I can't remember the game. i can't remember my adversary apart from he always occupied the first half of the following pairings: Cowboys and Indians,cops and robbers, goodies and baddies, heroes and villains.

I reluctantly and halfheartedly clutch my wheezy chest and lay down on the ground, careful to adjust the leaves and branches out of the path before properly dying, again.

Travel through time with me to earlier this year and these are the words I remember:

"Go easy on him, he's scared he's got his eyes closed! Open your eyes boy!"

These words were from one of the coaches at the boxing gym I'd attended a half dozen times.

Up until that evening I'd happily attended for a novel fitness experience and had spent my two hours shadow boxing, using the punchbags, skipping and using the dumbbells. This particular evening it had been decided that I was ready to spar with the others.

"We are apes with a glimmer of conscience" - Frank Schaeffer

We are a hardhearted people. From southern racists flying confederate flags, notwithstanding the pain this causes black passersby, to the New York Times defending using fetal body parts for experimentation– as if the only problem is one of legal technicalities– we human primates lack empathy.

The gun lobby insists on the right to carry weapons notwithstanding that children are gunned down as a result of easy access to assault weapons. And a Planned Parenthood official is taped eating lunch while casually discussing the dismemberment of unborn children and all the New York Times can come up with in defense of this callousness is that Planned Parenthood isn’t actually selling body parts.

What they do not dispute (because they can’t) is the fact that the tapes reveal a coldness of heart by Planned Parenthood when describing manipulating fetuses during abortions to keep certain parts intact while crushing the head in order to supply big pharma with organ tissue to experiment on.

We humans have a problem: We are apes with a glimmer of conscience.  That goes for the self-described enlightened as well as for the far right. As a species we’ve evolved just enough over the last one hundred thousand years or so to worry about the fact we’re just animals who behave like… animals.

See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/frankschaeffer/2015/07/we-are-a-hardhearted-people-jesus-the-planned-parenthood-videos-politics-and-guns-2/#sthash.8KWXvjwD.dpuf

'A More Beautiful Argument' from Perfection - Brad Jersak

Back in the day, from philosophers like Aristotle (in his Metaphysics) to theologians such as Thomas Aquinas, our best thinkers worked hard to develop rational proofs for the existence of God. Thomas summarized five of these in his massive book, Summa Theologica. The big five included:

• argument from motion (or 'the unmoved mover') - we see things in motion, something must ultimately cause the first motion, namely an 'unmoved mover,' who is God.

• argument from first cause (or 'efficient cause') - we see an order of cause and effect--nothing causes itself--so something must ultimately be the 'first efficient cause' of everything, who is God. 

• argument from contingency (or possibility & necessity) - we can see that everything in the world can possibly be or not be, but nothing is necessary in itself. They are 'contingent.' But to cause all these contingencies, there must be some being necessary in himself: God.

• argument from degree (or perfection) - we see that everything by degrees is better or worse. There must be something perfect which causes every other goodness or perfection, namely God.

• argument from design (or teleology) - we see that everything is designed to achieve the end for which it was designed. There must be an intelligent being directing everything to that end, namely God.

Bear with me, I'm not going to try to prove God exists. Some of these arguments have been soundly refuted, then defended, abandoned or upgraded. Not my job. I don't know about 'proving God' rationally. But eventually I want to borrow Aquinas' argument for perfection to say something about God's nature, if you believe in God already as a faith statement. Aquinas' argument from perfection basically runs like this:

Come and Die - Brian Zahnd

Incarnation and Incarnational - A Person and a Ministry - by Brad Jersak

The following articles are my reflections in response to John Starke's article, "THE INCARNATION IS ABOUT A PERSON, NOT A MISSION," in which I both affirm and resist in our joint quest for truth.

Dedicated to Bob and Gracie Ekblad and Tierra Nueva Ministries.

John Starke's article on the "Incarnation vis-a-vis incarnational ministry" is a good reminder that compassion ministries who work on the margins must not forget the person of Jesus. Period. With an asterisk or two.

 

I'd like to respond with some reflections of where I think the conversation is  more complex than what Starke presents. Pastorally, I want to affirm his call to Christ-centered ministry, while resisting the ways his article might diminish and discourage 'incarnational ministers.' Among the flaws and omissions (which are natural in a focused article that doesn't purport to say everything) I would flag as worrisome a. the either-or mentality of his premise, and more radically, b. the oversight the obvious Synoptic emphasis on God's criteria for judgment clearly based in deeds, and esp. deeds done unconditionally, without any thought even for their Christian purpose. Let me say a word to these points as I think need to be held in tension:

The "More Beautiful Gospel" Conference - Register Now

The Beautiful Gospel Conference​ official web page is complete and registration has just gone live. Join Brian Zahnd, Brad Jersak, Brian Doerksen and the Shiyr Poets -- Oct. 1-3 in Abbotsford.
Catch the early-bird price if you can. http://thebeautifulgospel.wix.com/thebeautifulgospel.

Not Whether But How: The Voice of the Church in Politics - Henry Smidstra

Not whether, but how. 

MP Wai Young

 Our British Columbia media recently jumped all over the situation of a sitting MP speaking in her Vancouver Church. From the pulpit she proclaimed that her party’s creation of bill C-51 on fighting the specter of terrorist activity in Canada reflected the courage and will of Jesus (Scott Brown. MP Compares government to Jesus in comments on anti-terrorism bill, Vancouver Sun, July 15, 2015, A 5). She had to sheepishly recant factual errors later, however, and there was considerable debate about the legal appropriateness for her exhort as she did as a sitting MP as well as questioning role of the church as a charitable organization to host the partisan speech. The situation does reflect the fact that both churches and MPs often have religiously-political shaped opinions, either explicitly or implicitly.  Absolute subjective neutrality is humanly impossible, but as a public servant, an MP should know better than to be openly religiously partisan, especially regarding a specific bill; professional discipline as public servant is necessary, unless of course she, or he, is simply interested only in votes, knowing that both the spoken religious convictions and the partisan political references resonate with the audience. The wider public might not be so impressed with the specific partisan identification of party courage with the “courage of Jesus”; a bit self-righteous or grandiose in my opinion.

But should not the Church be a passionate voice in its political interests and perspectives with its belief in Jesus Lordship over all of life? Does the separation of church and state doctrine mandate our being atheists or a-religious in the full spectrum of our public lives? The fundamental issue in my opinion is not whether the church should have a voice in the political arena, but rather just how it actually expresses its voice publically: passive aggressively; anti-intellectually moralistic; or, prudently wise and respectfully prophetic?

Dr. Katharine Hayhoe

In a The Vancouver Sun issue a few months ago, Katharine Hayhoe, Canadian born climate scientist and professor of political science in Texas, speaks of the high incidence of human caused climate change denial in the American Evangelical church. Hayhoe, suggests that, in the US where she works at present, political partisanship has taken over the church, and that especially in the evangelical church, it is actually political ideology that guides the faith, rather than faith guiding politics (William Marsden, A believer among skeptics, The Vancouver Sun, April 25, 2015, p. B 5). Hayhoe implies that when evangelicals generally think and act politically about climate change they do so according to the political ideology and policies of the political party they support, generally the Republican Party.  Also implied, however, is that that political party’s platform is parochial on this issue, nuanced and manipulated by specific evangelical beliefs. There is a kind of reciprocal, double-hermeneutic, at work here of faith being shaped by party ideology, and ideology shaped by the religious doctrines of the party’s supporters. Douglas Todd acknowledges that Canadian evangelical perspectives on climate change have a partisan basis was as well.  He also implies that Harper’s reluctance to get serious about climate change action is influenced by his evangelical beliefs. In general in the evangelical mind, human causes are either impossible, or of no consequence because of the belief in hard determinism, God absolutely controls everything; and believers will be raptured from the sorry consequences of global destruction anyway (Douglas Todd, Evangelicals get real about climate change. Vancouver Sun, May 9, 2015, F 5).

The Problem of Hell - Brad Jersak

Ron Dart: Post WWII Theological Landscape 6 NeoCalvinist-Postmodern-Classical tensions

NeoCalvinist-Postmodern-Classical tensions

Ron Dart: Post WWII Theological Landscape 5 Ressourcement and Renovare

Ressourcement and Renovare: Deep Mining and Cherry Picking

Ron Dart: Post WWII Theological Landscape 4 C.S. Lewis & the Evangelical-Calvinist Right

C.S. Lewis and the Evangelical-Calvinist Right

Ron Dart: Post WWII Theological Landscape 3 Contemplative Deepening & Great Tradition

The Contemplative Deepening and the Great Tradition:

Thomas Merton, Bede Griffiths, Richard Rohr

Ron Dart: Post WW II Theological Landscape 2 Prophetic Critique of the Sanhedrin

The Prophetic Critique of the Sanhedrin:

Jim Wallis, Ron Sider, Clark Pinnock, Donald Dayton

Ron Dart: Post WW II Theology 1 - The Evangelical Sanhedrin and Calvinism

The Post WW II Theological Landscape: The Evangelical Sanhedrin and Calvinism:

Billy Graham, Christianity Today, J.I. Packer, Carl Henry, Francis Schaeffer, Charles Colson, Richard Mouw

Erasing Labels - Bob Ekblad

Lately I have been especially struck by the destructive practice of labeling, and how widespread it is in our time. In America these days racial profiling seems to be on the rise. Partisan political categorizing and outright hatred towards people of different persuasions are increasing as we move towards a national election. I regularly hear people refer to others as right-wing republican, liberal, fundamentalist, illegal, racist, evil, terrorist or jihadist.

Around Tierra Nueva people struggle with labels continuously. Some seek to remove tattoos that mark them according to their gang affiliation. Others seek to find employers who will hire them in spite of their felon or ex-offender labels. Many of the people we serve have been diagnosed as ADD, psychotic, bipolar, borderline, and many others labels, and told by mental health professionals that their conditions are permanent, requiring them to be on meds for the rest of their lives.

I have grown to hate the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) and our current penal code. Labeling dehumanizes people, reducing them to something that is much easier to incarcerate, medicate, deport, hate or even eradicate. Labels categorize, entrap, curse and brand us in ways that are nearly impossible t shake. Thankfully when we find ourselves before Jesus there is hope. He can remove labels and undo “permanent” conditions!

The Day I Met Jesus - With Mary DeMuth - Brian Zahnd

Mary DeMuth and Frank Viola have written a fascinating book — The Day I Met Jesus: The Revealing Diaries of Five Women from the Gospels (Baker Books 2015). Recently I was able to interview Mary about this book and also ask her some questions about the role of women within Christianity and the church. Here is our conversation.

* * * * * *

BZ: In The Day I Met Jesus you tell fives stories of women who encountered Jesus. You do this in the form of first person diary entries. I love this imaginative approach. Could you talk about your process of creating the back-stories for these five women?

MD: Sure, first off, this idea was Frank’s. I’m grateful he pulled me in on this project. As a novelist, I tried to walk around in these women’s sandals, hoping to understand their dreams, the possible plight they were in, and what it must’ve been like to actually meet Jesus in the midst of their stories. I also did research about First Century Jerusalem as well as biblical research about the five women. And then I prayed. Actually I prayed throughout the entire process. What resulted? Gritty, real stories about actual women who were never the same after they encountered Christ.

BZ: Do you feel that the evangelical church has perhaps under appreciated the power of story?

MD: I think we’re getting better about this. Things like Donald Miller’s Story conference and the proliferation of YouTube (where we see millions of stories) encourage me. And when I go to church on Sunday I’m seeing more pastors tuck story into their narratives and theology. The human heart and mind better understand truth when wrapped in a story.

CLICK HERE to read more

Unconditional - John Caputo

In April 2015 fifty people from all over the world join Peter Rollins in the cultural heart of Belfast for four days full of talks, music, art, drinking, conversation and conspiring. This is a short talk from one of the afternoon sessions in which John Caputo reflects on Radical Theology and asks the question, "can it preach?"

2 Corinthians 5:21 - Michael Hardin

2 Corinthians 5:21

I am frequently asked how to interpret 2 Cor. 5:21. So today I will exegete this text so that if others want to know all I have to do is reference this FB post! (I don’t apologize for its length, this kind of work is necessary when one is overturning an 1,800 year old reading of a text).

2 Cor 5:21 is part of the larger context about reconciliation. Verses 14-17 state “The love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: one died for the sake of all; therefore, all died. 15 He died for the sake of all so that those who are alive should live not for themselves but for the one who died for them and was raised. 16 So then, from this point on we won't recognize people by human standards. Even though we used to know Christ by human standards, that isn't how we know him now. 17 So then, if anyone is in Christ, that person is part of the new creation. The old things have gone away, and look, new things have arrived!” (CEB)

Notice it is the love of Christ which controls, not the fear of God’s wrath, hell or punishment. Why does this love control Paul’s message? He concludes that with the death of Jesus something happened that included all humanity. As the True Human (‘ho huios tou anthropou’ in the Gospel tradition) or the Second Adam (in the Pauline tradition), Jesus is representative of all humanity. His death is the death of all. Even as he was raised so also, his resurrection brings life to all. Inasmuch as he did this for all, all may now live in him, through him and for him. Paul avers that he once judged Jesus ‘kata sarka’ (after the flesh or according to human standards) by which he means as one who was justifiably executed as a lawbreaker. Finally verse 17 is a first class condition; it is not a conditional ‘If’ but rather ‘since.’ In Christ, the eschatological horizon has been breached and the person whose identity is in Jesus smile emoticon all) is part of the new promised creation of God.

Verses 18-20 then form why the theme of reconciliation is announced: “All of these new things are from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and who gave us the ministry of reconciliation. 19 In other words, God was reconciling the world to himself through Christ, by not counting people's sins against them. He has trusted us with this message of reconciliation. 20 So we are ambassadors who represent Christ. God is negotiating with you through us. We beg you as Christ's representatives, "Be reconciled to God!" (CEB) Verse 18 states that it is God who has taken the initiative for our salvation by reconciling us to God’s self. Nowhere is there any language of penal substitution or satisfaction, no mention of the wrath of God or the threat of hell. As those who have recognized this reconciliation, God has entrusted this message: “You are reconciled. From God’s perspective there is no distance, no abyss that must be crossed or bridged. The apostolic message is thus one of recognition. “God has reconciled you to God’s very self. It is a done fact, a fait accompli. It is Reality, capital R. You haven’t heard? Come then, turn and walk into the open loving arms of God.”