I really can’t begin to tell people just how much I can’t stand the “Rapture” stuff. I really hate it, I think it’s an insult to the Faith and an insult to the Lord Jesus Christ.
No, I don’t have anything really “intelligent” to say here, this is it, more of a complaint than a post. Just needed a place to do it.
Seems to me the more I hear terms like “Conservative Christians” and “Liberal Christians” the more worthless the terms “liberal” and “conservative” come to be in describing what kind of Christian a Christian is. What exactly makes someone liberal or conservative as a Christian?
I understand the use of these terms in political dialogue, but have a harder time understanding them in inter-Christian dialogue.
Is John Spong a liberal Christian because he is both politically and theologically “liberal”? Because he rejects traditional Christian ideas, I think, doesn’t make him liberal, it makes him heterodox.
One reason I’ve found these terms to be essentially useless is that in my own experience, some of the most theologically articulate, devout and firmly orthodox Christians I’ve had the pleasure of knowing have been called “liberal”; whereas I’ve met plenty of so-called “conservative” Christians who wouldn’t know traditional Christian faith if it fell on their head like a ton of bricks.
I’ve met plenty of “conservative” Evangelicals who certainly fit the mold of stereotypical American Evangelicalism who, in my discussions with them over theology, come across as holding to fairly heterodox positions. A classic case-in-point are “conservative” Evangelicals who are either completely ignorant of, or sometimes even actively hostile to the orthodox, traditional Christian belief in the resurrection of the dead.
In recent years I’ve increasingly been told that I’m among these “liberal” Christians, though I’m not sure how. My faith has always–and no doubt will continue to be–a work in progress. My aim, however continues to be consistent, to follow Christ, to challenge my preconceived ideas, and be willing to study, read, pray and seek the guiding of the Holy Spirit and the counsel of the Christian Church. I’m not content assuming I have everything figured out, but I am ardent about seeking to be faithful.
I don’t consider myself “liberal”, but I have over the years lost interest in identifying myself as “conservative”. Any allegiance I once had to the Theo-Political machine of the American Religious Right has thoroughly vanished, though I hold no ill will toward those who are part of this organism, I do see the ideology and policies of the Religious Right as viral and infectious, and not to mention fatal to the spiritual health of the Christian Church in America.
So exactly what function or purpose do terms like “liberal” or “conservative” have in inter-Christian discussion? What does it even matter? Is faithfulness to Christ circumscribed by fidelity to conservative American politics? When so much about conservative American politics seems to be deeply antagonistic against the ethos and ministry of Jesus, how can this be so? This is not to say that liberal American politics are any better, seems like both sides of the political divide are pretty problematic insofar as what Jesus has to say. Wouldn’t a better, and far more Christian, politic be to take what Jesus has to say, even if Jesus forces us to repent of our most strongly cherished ideas, and work from there?
I’m not advocating Christian politics in the typical sense, but rather a Christian alternative to American politics that is still quite political. Christianity is political. Not because it’s liberal or conservative, but because it’s Christian. Shouldn’t a Christian response to those things happening in our culture be, in fact, Christian? Neither conservative nor liberal, but Christian. Following the Way of Christ, even if that means forsaking the idols of Elephant and Ass.
It’s not Easter time, so no this post has no particular liturgical significance. I don’t plan on writing a long post on recent theological musings, thoughts or things I’ve read or had discussions about.
This post is to speak to something I think is far more profound, and deeply more important. Jesus lives. This simple proclamation says so much, but far too often in my own life I don’t move in the world as though Jesus lives. I confess it creedally, I confess it in song, I confess it in prayer, and theologically. But that Jesus lives is often distant, a theological principle and idea, rather than a vibrant reality that turns the world–and me–upside down.
Jesus lives. No, really, He’s alive. He’s not dead anymore, and I don’t mean that in some esoteric super nifty secret Gnostic way either. Jesus lives.
Yeah, that Jesus. Not some “cosmic Christ” or spiritual entity. That guy whose mom was named Mary, yeah, that’s the one. He’s who I’m taking about. He’s alive, He died, but then He stopped being dead, and He’s alive. In fact He’s so alive that He killed death. You heard me, He killed death. He’s not dead, death is dead.
I just thought it was important enough to bear repeating.
So I spend a lot of time browsing the interweb and reading various articles, blogs, just about anything that might catch my interest. I spend a consider amount of time reading various blogs and articles which are influenced or are part of the Emergent movement. Sometimes–even usually–I really like what is said. I also really enjoy reading and engaging material dealing with the Christian peace movement as I’m a committed pacifist who believes–quite strongly–that to follow Jesus means (without exception) refusing to take up the sword or my fists.
Some might dub me a “liberal” in some kind of political sense because of my fairly strong dislike for the Religious Right, “conservative politics” and all that jazz.
But there’s also something that sometimes sticks like a pin prick on occasion, because sometimes I get the sense that for many who might describe themselves as “Emergent” or “Progressively Evangelical” or similar self denominating titles is that it still feels like the kind of hip, cool dreads and tattoo Evangelicalism that I once knew. While it’s not hippsters talking hellfire and brimstone, it still seems so “boringly radical”. Radical for the sake of radicality utterly bores me. I love beer, tobacco, tattoos, rock music and curse as much as the next post-post-post-whatever person. But that in itself is just boring and unimpressive, as unimpressive as that is what I feel is sometimes a lack of appreciation for the radicality of traditional–ordinary–Christianity.
I dislike trying to make Christianity cool. No. Let me rephrase that, I despise trying to make Christianity cool. Christianity isn’t cool, it never was cool, and it never will be cool. Jesus isn’t cool.
I’m reminded of a bumper sticker recently, “I was uncool before being uncool was cool.”
Over the last few years I’ve seen “being geek” become trendy, suddenly wearing glasses, playing video games and liking Star Wars went from being an offense punishable from the local school bully to making you a rock star. Hey, I’ve been a video game playing loser since I was five, so the fact that now chicks dig guys who play Xbox makes me feel sexy. Problem is, it’s suddenly “cool” to be “uncool”.
Jesus shouldn’t be cool, even by making Him “uncool” in order to do so. Being “liberal” or opposing institutionalized Evangelicalism doesn’t really mean shit.
“Give me that old time religion” is a phrase that comes to mind here. I like traditional, boring, regular Christianity. It is Christianity. I’m not saying we should all be doing a Tridentine Mass, but without the substance of tradition it’s just being trendy for the sake of being trendy. Feel free to challenge the tradition, but we can’t simply be reinventing the wheel every twenty or thirty years.
All I’m really saying, and I realize this is kind of a rather aimless, meandering rant, is that Christianity is just Christianity, we should let it be what it is.
Insofar as the various forms of the “Emergent Movement” challenges modern Evangelicals to rethink their assumptions and invites us to look openly and honestly at our ancient tradition and theological heritage and at the broader Christian tradition as a whole I think it’s a good thing. Where it starts to make me feel a little queasy is when it starts to look like an outer shell of “radness” without the real radicality of the Christian Gospel.
Christ has died.
Christ is risen.
Christ will come again.
