White privilege and hope for the future

As a Christian, there is a particular vision of the future that I hold too. Generally speaking, this eschatological view is not one of escapism, but rather of restoration. This sort of vision has developed from numerous sources and I can’t say it’s totally original to me.[1] However, the point is this; instead of the goal being to get to heaven and escape this world and then watch as God destroys it and replaces it with another, God is actively involved in restoring and redeeming this world and that the new one will be birthed from it. This “new world” may not necessarily be a new physical creation, but it will be one without the violence and death that is present here and now. This can be a hard version to have and there is a lot to work out with it, but this progressive vision of the future sees us as humans actively involved. We are God’s agents in renewing and restoring the world. Because I hold to this vision of the future, I am particularly affected when I see some sort of injustice, especially a systemic one, befall somebody.

Which is all why I found the Trayvon Martin case so frustrating. Not only was this a sign of the sort of reactionary “me first” revenge violence we always see, but it was also wrapped up with issues of systemic prejudice. The responses to the verdict hammered this home even more. I was shocked to see so many people claim that African Americans, in particular President Obama, were the real racists in this case. It all brought the notion of white privilege to bear on the situation.[2]

For a while now, sociologists and other cultural researchers have pointed to the increase in non-white groups in the United States. This is a good thing, in my opinion, as it only increases the diversity and complexity of the U.S. If the country is truly going to be a melting pot, then it needs to continually be welcoming in those who are “other.” Too often though, especially among the Conservative crowd, the reaction is that something is being lost, rather than gained. With this latest element of reverse racism, they are right that something is being lost; the privileged status of white individuals (especially men). This doesn’t mean anyone is being racist against them. On the contrary, it’s simply us as a country finally seeing the cracks in the systemic racism that has created white privilege. There is still a long way to go, as the Martin/Zimmerman case so clearly shows.

Here is the connection I am making; privilege is against the new world that Christians are called to create. Systemic privilege, in this case white privilege, is antithetical towards the justice that will come in the new creation. It is antithetical towards the universal reconciliation that Christ’s death and resurrection heralded.[3] It is antithetical towards the “first shall be last and the last shall be first.”[4] It will not exist in the new creation and we need to be working towards ending it. The first step is confronting it and with the reactions to the Martin case, it seems too many still haven’t done this. That will change. It must. It has too. I have hope that it will.[5] As of now, it is still an issue and one we must confront and dismantle. Inequality is sin and it does not belong in God’s new world.

Credit for giving me the direction for this post, after many drafts of what to say about white privilege, goes to the sermon Andy Lucas of Emmaus Road gave a couple weeks ago. You can listen here. 

---

[1] For the most part, the popular and well known version of the end of the world/afterlife is going to heaven and leaving this world behind. I fall in line with N.T. Wright (and others) who view the “end” and “heaven” as restoring this world, not leaving it behind. Wright’s Surprised by Hope outlines this view well.

[2] The clearest indication of this is in the responses from Conservatives towards Obama’s speech after the Trayvon martin case, some of which can be read here.

[3] I also don’t hold to the Calvinistic idea that only “some” are saved, but rather that Christ’s death gave salvation to all. How this works out functionally is another post for another day.

[4] Matthew 20:16- The parable that precedes this famous verse is taking about role reversal in the hopes of showing the original audience, and anyone else, that in God’s kingdom there are no authority structures as are seen in our culture (and the ancient culture).

[5] If you want to see an indication of this, check out the youtube video for “Kids React to Controversial Cherrios Commercial” from The Fine Bros.

“Regular people,” just stop saying it!

It’s one of the most ideological phrases we use. “Regular people.” You hear it all the time, with statements like “I prefer (insert town) over (insert other town) because it’s full of regular people. It’s not uppity.” The problem is that this assumes a couple things, chief among them is the assumption that there are such creatures known as “regular people.” This itself presupposes that there are “irregular” people to contrast with the regular people.

When individuals use this phrase, it’s usually tied into a classist assumption, like the phrase above, that those who have more are not “regular people.” They, in fact, don’t understand the plight of the “working man.” Nor do they understand what it means to live day to day, pay check to pay check. These aren’t the kind of people who will sit on the porch and drink a Bud Light. The working man’s beer. No, they have to have wine. Or microbrews. However, this assumption does more damage to the “regular people” it is trying to bolster than they realize. In actuality, they are reinforcing the structure they find themselves, by taking pride in not being the well off Other, they are asserting that this is the structure they prefer to reside in, and so nothing changes. Likewise, it marks out the more affluent as un-human.

There are no regular people though. Apart from the classist bent, the phrase also presupposes that there is some definition of “regular” that everyone can agree upon, but just as there are no two snowflakes the same, so no two people are. Scratch the suffer of someone’s “normal” life and you’ll find a multitude of unique experiences that have shaped and molded them. Even similar experiences are uniquely different, as the perception of the event varies between people. As much as normative structures may call us to some sort of homogenous identity, and they do a good job of it, it will still fall short.

In short, stop using the phrase “normal people.” We all deserve to be treated better than “normal.”

Convincing the chickens

The above video is from Peter Rollins where he talks about what change should be in the Christian church. Take the ten minutes to watch the video before you read what I have to say. It’s the perfect lead into I want to talk about; what does it look like to have real change?

Verses in Exile: Why I Write by Kosal Khiev

Poetry is what got me into writing. While I started out wanting to be a novelist, all my early attempts failed. As soon as I started writing poetry, though, my writing took off. I was prolific. Whenever I need to be reminded why I love the written word, I read some poetry.

I find myself incredibly moved by this video from spoken word artist Kosal Khiev. The emotion drips from every frame and his words for why he writes cut deep. It’s one of those moments when I recognize my own privilege and at the same time greatly desire for voices that are not as privileged as my own to be heard. If I say anymore, this will become about me and it isn’t. Take the time to watch and listen. Absolutely beautiful.

-Dan

Religious art; is it bad?

My wife recently ran across a painting in the Christian bookstore that she described as “a creepy Jesus painting” that resembles a friend of ours. I laughed when I saw it, both for the resemblance and the typical European look of Jesus. I snapped a picture, texted it to my friend with the title of “self-portrait?” and got a good response from him. Below is the offending photo:

What I didn’t realize is that this is apparently the work of a “child prodigy” by the name of Akiane. It’s also the picture that Colton Burpo (the Heaven is for Real kid) said is accurate to the Jesus he saw in heaven. Now, I don’t want to get into that, but there is something else to be said about the proliferation of this image. Despite being done by a child prodigy, the painting has all the shades of the “bad art” that is levied at Christianity. It’s an image that has technical expertise, no doubt, but little beyond that. It’s a kind faced, unassuming Jesus who wouldn’t dare hurt a fly. It’s a white Jesus. A very white Jesus. And it’s popular enough to be sold mass market and framed in a border with scripture printed in Times New Roman at a chain Christian store. Like I said, all the qualities of bad art. But is it bad art or does it say something else?

Evangelism beyond easy answers.

Growing up in Evangelical Christianity, I was lead to believe that if I didn’t witness to people every chance I got, then I was somehow not truly expressing my belief in God. Likewise, I can acutely remember a sermon the pastor of my childhood church gave, where he equated God’s favor with leading at least one person to Christ. This messed with me a lot as I hadn’t done that (and as far as I know, have yet too). When I came out of Evangelical Christianity into the emergent community in college, I thought I had found an expression of Christianity that fit. An expression that had it “figured out.” Flash forward a few years to now and, after a period of deeply felt and stated agnosticism, I am once again embracing the religion of my childhood. While I would not call myself an Evangelical per se, I still hold strong ties to that expression of Christianity and in the past few years I’ve found myself trying to negotiate the space where I can be both an avowed believer and skeptic. As such, I’ve recently begun to wonder how one is to even have an evangelical posture when this is the case. I think, two recent experiences, highlight where I’ve come to land on this issue.

Recently, I’ve found myself engaged in conversations with people who are “seeking.” These are people who, like me, grew up in some form of Christianity, gave it up at some point, and now find themselves tentatively holding religious beliefs while not being particularly religious. As we’ve talked, I’ve seen myself in many of the things they’ve said. The unknowing, the desire for something to seem real to them again, but the deep dissatisfaction with the current state of their faith. In these conversations, I’ve wondered exactly how I am supposed to respond and the way I respond is significantly different from the way I would have in my youth.

In one conversation in particular, I found myself stating that I was “pretty agnostic/atheistic” a few years ago, but that I still feel there is value in holding faith to Christ and in Christianity. In spite of all the problems I have with it, it still gives me a sense of hope. The second conversation went similarly; ultimately, I landed on the point that there are days when it seems easier to just give up all this “God nonsense,” but that my experiences and the hope I find in Jesus is what keeps me around. I’m not pushing them to “make a decision,” I’m simply conversing about what I perceive to be is a similar experience. I don’t know how deeply my words are felt, but I hope they are at least taken seriously and genuinely.

For some, this may seem like lukewarm evangelism. Perhaps a better term might be “soft evangelism.” The idea that I may not have all the answers, that I’m not pushing God on them like a product, but that I’m trying to be honest about why I still hold faith in a God that oftentimes can be difficult to believe in. It’s a hard place to be. There is no satisfaction of “closing the deal.” There’s just me, trying to be as open and bare as I can. I imagine, or at least hope, that God is far more interested in that than in how effectively I can rack up the souls for him. Besides, it’s not really me that’s supposed to be doing the saving in the first place, is it?

Learning from others; the value of mentorship.

I recently finished my first semester of teaching at the college level. I feel that it wound up being a good semester and that I had a good repore with my class. Unfortunately, of the students who did their evaluations, all were negative.* This is obviously one of those “knife in the heart moments” and it made me realize just how bad I’ve gotten at dealing with negative criticism. At a certain point in my life, I didn’t really have this problem. I took the stance that, if you don’t like what I do, that’s your problem. This isn’t the best attitude to take for teaching though. Teaching, in my view, is not about me. It’s about the students and if I fail them in some regard, then I am failing as a teacher (to an extent). I do know the areas where I didn’t meet the standard and I know exactly why; because I personally didn’t have the knowledge.

I’ve come to teaching in a backwards way. I didn’t study education in my bachelor’s and I had a focus on Literature and Critical Theory in my master’s. To say I’m at an immediate deficit is clear. So what do I need to overcome these things? Honestly, I think I need a mentor.

I’ve always been resistant to the idea of mentorship. The relationship between mentor/mentee is one that I haven’t purposefully sought. As a good American, I had pretty much bought individualism hook, line and sinker. It’s only recently that I’ve begun to critique that notion and what I think I’ve discovered is that it is antithetical to mentorship. It assumes that you can’t do it on your own. That you need help. That there is someone wiser than you, who can teach you. In the face of harsh individualism, at least the form I grew up believing in, it was always, “I’m smart enough, good enough, and can do it on my own.”

The past few months, I served in a mentor like capacity for a friend of mine and it was really good. Even though this has ended, it’s helped to solidify the idea of mentorship into my mind. I need someone to mentor me, to teach me how to be a better teacher myself. More so than that, I think I need someone to talk to who can give me solid advice for life. I don’t know where to find this person, but I do recognize the need. Until then, I’ll just push forward with as much humility, drive, and passion as I can muster and get as much help along the way as I can find.

Do you think a mentor is a good thing? Why or Why not?

____________________

*To be totally honest though, it was only a small fraction who did the online evaluations. I imagine if the few who had shook my hand at the end of class and told me they enjoyed it had done theirs, it would have been a more complete picture. As it stands, from a purely course evaluation picture, it looks like I was an absent minded, contradictory, never-there professor.

Give unto Caesar…

Today is election day in the United States of America. Families will be divided, friendships will be strained and all because of the assumption that your vote is your voice. While this is an easily deconstructable argument, that’s not what I want to talk about today. For me, election day will always have a religious dimension to it. From the earliest that I can remember, voting on election day is not just a patriotic duty, but it is also a spiritual and moral obligation. Growing up in a politicized, Evangelical culture I was taught that we must “vote our values” and stop the advance of the great humanist surge. Or something. However it was framed, it was my Christian duty to uphold the values of the Bible by casting my vote for the  correct (i.e. Republican) candidate and cause.

While I don’t hold to Republicanism or Conservatism hardly at all anymore, I haven’t exactly jumped to the Left. Honestly, both frustrate me. And I think, in some sense, this is how the Bible frames it. What hasn’t changed for me, is the connection between election day and Christianity. Because my vote, or lack thereof, is deeply tied to my beliefs and this is why I will not be voting this election season.

The familiar passage for Christian engagement in political issues is in Mark 12:14-17, and it is the scene where Jesus is asked wether taxes should be paid to Caesar. He states, famously, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.” Here, coupled with the declaration of St. Paul to obey earthly rulers because God ordains them, has been the impetuous to political activism. Paul, however, was not talking about blind allegiance. Rather, he was speaking of following God’s authority. It’s not about the government, it’s about who is greater than the government. Likewise, Jesus here isn’t stating, “pay your taxes,” rather He is calling us to decide what is God’s.

Caesar’s image is on the coin. Therefore, this is a reflection of Caesar. It is his power, his authority, his dominion. Same can be said of our own money. Presidential heads appear on the money. It is the United States. Likewise, as human beings hold within us the imago dei, the image of God. So, what should we be reflecting? Who should have our lives? “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and God what is God’s.”

This isn’t to state that we can’t be engaged in the political process. Indeed, nearly everything in life is political. It’s hard to avoid this. But, as Christians, how should our approach be? I would argue that any political stance that seeks to give to Caesar what should be Gods’, is a wrongheaded political stance. This is why I am not voting (well, one of many reasons). My hope does not lie in who will become president. It does not lie in what the outcome of some amendment. It lies in God. In God’s ability to provide, to restore, to heal and to guide humanity regardless of who wins an election and how long a political power lasts.

For a fantastic, Ecumenical movement check out Election Day Communion; http://electiondaycommunion.org/fref=ts

Another perspective on nostalgia.

In a sense I’m hoping nostalgia doesn’t become some new fascination with me. The last thing I need is ANOTHER “something” to rattle around in my mind. That said…

Here’s Svetlana Boym on nostalgia! Boym is a professor of Slavic and Comparative literatures at Harvard, which pretty much makes her the most interesting person to me this weekend. I personally love the whole idea of slow thinking, even though it kind of goes against my thesis on nostalgia from last week. Oh well. Enjoy and discuss!

 

The psychic power of your smart phone.

Psychic powers don’t exist. There is no way for me to transmit my thoughts into your brain just by willing it. This is a typical skeptic response and one that I’ve uttered many times (and still wholeheartedly endorse). When it comes to the supernatural or magical, I’m pretty critical and it takes a lot for me to find my way to believing in it (this precisely why God-belief has been such a struggle for me. It’s also why I cling so strongly to Jesus, but that’s another post for another day). However, I am open to exploring the possibility that we have inadvertently created our own psychic phenomenon; through that little gadget called a smart phone.

In the current age of the digital realm, my thoughts are open to communication twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Typing this blog post is a small example of this, as my thoughts pour onto the computer screen and with the push of a button, I will have transmitted my thoughts to anyone who will listen. A step further is text messaging. I can send whatever random thought to any friend who has the ability  to receive it and, so long as they are willing to respond quickly, I can receive a message back in less than a minute. Without ever uttering a word, we can exchange thoughts in an instant. Over hundreds of miles even. The reality of the world we live in is one of immediacy and the quick thought expulsion that happens is a mere reflection of this.

I’m not trying to get down on smart phones. I own one. It’s the one pictured above.* It has helped me to be better at responding to emails, keeping in contact with people and been a great distraction. I’ve read great books on it and wasted hours flinging birds. However, it gives me the ability to not retain any thought for later explanation. I can send it to “you” instantaneously. In fact, I can even gain mental abilities I never would have had. I’ll never get lost again, thanks to GPS. I’ll always have the answer I need to a question thanks to 4G networks and Google. See my point? My brain can now do things only science fiction could imagine 50 years ago and all I need is a little piece of technology that weighs less than some decks of cards. Technology is great, but sometimes the ways it changes us can be astounding and maybe even a little terrifying.

*For you Apple fanatics out there, don’t hate on me for having an Android phone. By the way, I think this phone is awesome.