Soulgardeners

Liam's second birthday - some thoughts and prayers

Liam, you are celebrating your second birthday today.  My son, I love you deeply.  You are now constructing stuttering five word sentences.  Your speech is concise and to the point.  Your “yes” is your “yes” and your “no” is your “no”.  “Dad, I’m just playing” is the answer you regularly give to my question, “What are you doing?” Your favourite answer and activity is the same.  Playing.  Your stuttering speech is totally over gulfed by the poetry of your play.

I know that at some point you will be asking those existential questions that come with the privilege you are born into. 

“What will I do with my life?” – the question I ask you now will be asked in the wider context of your life.

I pray that you will be able to answer that question with an awareness that privilege leads to responsibility.  I pray that you will become a human being who lives his responsibility with the same playfulness you show now.

When you are excited you show it verbally and bodily.  Your “Yipee!” and your body’s jump-skip-run operates in perfect synchronization (just as your “Ouch or No!” and your body’s crying has the same harmonization). 

I pray that you will be able to keep the communication between your speech and your body intact.  When I see your holistic coordination it inspires me.  Your candidness calls me into a life without lies.  Another word that strikes me is when you say “again!” almost always with an intense laugh from your stomach.  You never tire of an activity that is fun.  You are deeply creative even within monotonous activities.  In this you’re moving me to find pleasure in the every-day-rhythms of life.

My son, you make me smile.  When I play with you I remember that I’m at heart also a child.  It is a joy to play with you and to discover life with you.  Today, as we celebrate your birthday, I am reminded that in your playfulness you show me something of our Creator.  GK Chesterton described it well when he wrote that,

Because children have abounding vitality, because they are in spirit fierce and free, therefore they want things repeated and unchanged. They always say, “Do it again”; and the grown-up person does it again until he is nearly dead. For grown-up people are not strong enough to exult in monotony. But perhaps God is strong enough to exult in monotony. It is possible God says every morning, “Do it again” to the sun; and every evening, “Do it again” to the moon. It may not be automatic necessity to make all daisies appear alike; it may be that God makes every daisy separately, but has never grown tired of making them. It may be that He has the eternal appetite for infancy: for we have sinned and grown old, and our Father is younger than we.”[1]

Liam I pray that you and I will learn how to play within the story our Trinitarian God has been playing all along.  I love you.

 

---

[1] Chesterton. GK “Orthodoxy”

When whites want forgiveness - the other side of the forgiveness coin (part2)

The title of this post shows the subtle nuance that occurs when the topic of forgiveness is brought up in South Africa.  There is a big difference between the phrases “when whites repent” and “when whites want forgiveness”.

“When whites want forgiveness”, positions whites as the subjects and blacks as the objects.  Blacks are used for absolution.  Whites get and blacks give.

This confusion of subject/object places the white minority at the centre of the discussion - again.  They (we) become the axis around which the universe turns.  Whites, ironically, become the beneficiaries of a forgiveness dialogue or process wherein they are supposed to confess that they are beneficiaries of gross human violations – apartheid.   Whites stay the beneficiaries through this process – first materially and then also emotionally.  Desmond Tutu describes this when he writes that,

Many white people in South Africa have come to see themselves as entitled to reconciliation and forgiveness without their having to lift so much as a little finger to aid this crucial and demanding process.[1]

Let me just state clearly that I believe that forgiveness is important – because it primarily releases the wronged and not the wrongdoer.  “To forgive is not just to be altruistic. It is the best form of self-interest.”[2]

It is when forgiveness becomes a manipulating tool in the hand of the wrongdoer that the wrongs are perpetuated.  The wrongdoer cannot wield the axe of forgiveness while guarding the loot accumulated through the act of wrongdoing! For this will just perpetuate the wrongs.

Scandalously (for that is what grace is), the wronged will have to forgive the wrongdoer even for this manipulation.  But this forgiveness can happen without condoning the wrongdoer’s manipulation or original wrongdoing.

The wrongdoer has to focus on his/her repentance and work it out in terms of acts of contrition towards the ones he/she wronged.  When a wrongdoer approaches the wronged and asks for forgiveness without acknowledging the wrong – then the wronged is abused further.

This is where we as white followers of Jesus will have to step up to the plate and live into a life of corporate repentance.  How do we do this?

We start by acknowledging racism on an individual and a structural basis. We acknowledge that we are indeed beneficiaries of a brutal past.  Yes, I know the discussion is more nuanced than this. Yet without a baseline acknowledgment of the fact that we have benefited from apartheid as whites, we cannot talk about a road of repentance – for this will be to live in denial (which is not a river in Africa).

We have to acknowledge our individual racism as well as the structural racism that benefitted us.  This acknowledgment is described by Klippies Kritzinger,

When I was younger I often resented being an Afrikaner, but as I grew older I realised that it didn’t help denying it. In fact, I became aware how important it was to affirm my Afrikaner roots and to acknowledge my privileged past, with the benefits that flowed from that for me. I was not a perpetrator of blatant racism under apartheid. By the grace of God I discover at the age of 19 that apartheid was fundamentally wrong and unchristian. So I started worshipping in black congregations and working with black colleagues and friends to articulate a Christian witness for unity and justice in an oppressive and divided land. However, all of that did not make me black or take away the fact that I was a beneficiary under apartheid. I had economic and educational privileges and many other opportunities that were not available to the black young people my age. It is for this reason that I (still) call myself white, to express the fact that my identity was racialised — against my will — by the power structures of apartheid.[3]

As a start I think that we as whites have to remember the history of our country.  This remembrance can then lead to an acknowledgment of our privilege –what has been called ‘white privilege’.  Once this acknowledgment is there, then we can move on to living lives where this remembering of the past can lead to a future of grace-based embodied repentance, constituting in a new community. 

Maybe we need a white leader who can write a book entitled “No future without repentance”?

We, as whites, have been given an amazing gift in 1994.  That gift was one of forgiveness.  Do you still remember how there was fear that whites would be driven into the sea and chased out of South Africa? Tutu remarks that,

… I have sadly to note that a very large section of the white community have forgotten, far too easily and far too soon, that our country was indeed on the verge of a catastrophe which could have seen us overwhelmed by the kind of carnage and unrest that have characterized places such as Bosnia, Kosovo, the Middle East, and Northern Ireland. We should all be filled to overflowing with immense gratitude that things turned out differently, that we have been blessed to have as President someone who has become an international icon of forgiveness and reconciliation, and that so many in our land have emulated their President. One has longed so eagerly and so desperately for a like generosity of spirit to have been evoked in the white community by the magnanimity of those in the black community who, despite the untold suffering inflicted so unnecessarily on them, have been ready to forgive their tormentors.

When a wrongdoer receives the gift of forgiveness he has to work with that gift in an appropriate way.  Forgiveness opens the door for a possible journey.  The forgiven who takes the forgiveness serious, becomes someone else through the forgiveness.  Forgiveness places a grace-energized invitation to a new journey at the heart of the forgiven.

Jesus taught us that,

Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love.” ^[4]

Yet, when the forgiven doubts his/her complicacy in the act forgiven, then that same life-giving energy is not released.

“But the one to whom little is forgiven, loves little.”

---

[1] “No future without forgiveness”, D. Tutu p.164

[2] Ibid,. p.31

[3] Kritzinger, Klippies in a paper entitled, “Liberating whiteness” p.6

^[4]The Holy Bible : New Revised Standard Version. 1989 (Lk 7:47). Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville

The other side of the forgiveness coin

Last week I had the privilege to facilitate a conversation for a group that recently visited the Apartheid Museum.  Together we explored the stories we were told of why Apartheid happened, the narratives that provided plausibility structures to the gross separation in our country.

We divided into smaller groups and then gathered for feedback.  What happened next has stayed with me for the last few days.  The group voiced that they didn’t want to talk about this topic anymore – it was too painful for a few of the women present.  Through an interpreter one particular woman explained that under Apartheid she lost both her parents and that her brother was hung and flogged. 

As she shared her story of a deeply traumatic past tears streamed down her cheeks.  It was one of those holy moments.  We sat in silence with her. Eventually we had to voice something and we explored how her story made the rest of us feel.

During the last few weeks the media has been full of explorations of forgiveness.  What does forgiveness mean in our country? 

This discussion, as I posted last week, was launched by prof. Jansen’s forgiveness of the Reitz 4.  As I said in that post, I think it is essential for whites to focus on the other side of forgiveness – we have to explore white repentance. 

In remembering Apartheid dare whites continually focus on how the blacks should forgive?  Isn’t this a clever way of manoeuvring the conversation away from our responsibility (as whites) to live repentant lives in South Africa?

In our multiracial group we have a saying that when you share, you have to “go direct to the city and not via Emmerentia”.  It is a way of urging people to keep their talking concise – like taking a taxi directly to Johannesburg.  If someone talks too long, they take a taxi via the Emmerentia suburb. 

Forgiveness in our South African context has to go via Emmerentia – to use the metaphor.  It is a journey through the detours of our South African past, through the roads of white repentance and black forgiveness (and dare I say black repentance and white forgiveness).

Last week I attended a bi-weekly leadership meeting where Anathi, Thabo and Kutloano explained to me why forgiveness is hard for black South Africans.  I will mention three of the reasons.

Firstly, it is hard because many churches have taught people that to “forgive is to forget”.  When forgiveness comes up in our South African context, it sounds like a movement towards forgetting.  It sounds like a wiping away of the oppressive past, a form of amnesia.

Secondly, it is hard because many blacks have experienced a ‘shallow repentance’ from white people.  When whites want forgiveness they say sorry with their lips but not with their lives.  A few black friends of mine have gone through the pain of a white person extracting forgiveness from them and after they have received the pardon, the white person disengages with the black person.  As a newly- forgiven-white-person they continue in a whites-only privileged life. Blacks become forgiveness ATM’s.

Thirdly, it is hard because many blacks conflate forgiveness, reconciliation and justice into the word FORGIVENESS.  So when there is talk of forgiveness but no change in physical circumstances a deep resentment and suspicion arise.  This is epitomized by one of my friends who commented that, “the white man came to our country, taught us Christianity, took our land and then told us to forgive – and they still have the land!”

In the aftermath of Jonathan Jansen’s speech and pardon last week, this sentiment was described by the Young Independent Democrats (YID). They stated that,

"Why is it that black South Africans are always under more pressure to forgive than whites are to show remorse and ask for that forgiveness?"

That is a wonderful question to explore – tomorrow I want to explore some of the ways in which “whites are to show remorse” 

PS> Cobus also posted some thoughts on this here.

Forgiveness - contested in South Africa

I have a lot on my mind.  Foremost is our multicultural discussion last night.  We looked at the topic of forgiveness and used the new Rector of the University of Free-state’s act of forgiveness.  On Friday he pardoned the men in the now famous Reitz-scandal.  Our group also looked at the Lord’s prayer and we discussed:

• What is needed to ask for forgiveness?
• How do we offer forgiveness?

The emotions ran high as we listened to the different perspectives in our group.  Some felt that Jonathan Jansen was right in his offering of forgiveness.  Others questioned whether he had the right to offer forgiveness on behalf of those who were wronged and wondered how they were involved.  Yet another group felt that he offered forgiveness in order to just save the institution, that black people once again had to 'just forgive'.

One thing is for sure.  Forgiveness is contested in our South African context.

Here is what I think. Instead of just focusing on forgiveness in our South African context, I think it is important to also talk about repentance.  What would appropriate repentance look like in a post-Apartheid South Africa? 

What I’m learning in our inter-cultural group is that there is a deep suspicion of a forgiveness narrative that is shallow.  A sorry that doesn’t show repentance, a forgiveness that is demanded from the wronged while the perpetrators don’t change.

We all know the emptiness when we say sorry without connecting the sorry with our hearts and our lives.  This is the kind of sorry/repentance that is shallow and has to be deepened. 

De Gruchy captures this shallow forgiveness narrative when he writes that,

`Forgiveness’ is a word that easily trips off our tongues, especially if we are not the victims of oppression and injustice. It is easy for us who are not victims to tell them to forgive their enemies; it is also relatively easy for oppressors to ask for forgiveness. The problem is that forgiveness can be manipulated by the dominant in such a way that it strengthens their position and weakens that of the victim. Forgiveness thus becomes a tool in the manipulation of power relations, making the oppressed even more a victim of injustice. 

I agree with this statement.  That’s why I think that before we have a forgiveness debate, we need a repentance debate.  Yet, I would contend that it is important to forgive and that forgiveness frees the one who has been wronged and becomes an invitation for the wrongdoer to change.

Take some time to read Jansen’s speech … and I would love to hear your comments.

Desmond Tutu commended Jansen, saying:

"It is people like you who will make our beloved country the great land it can become. God bless you.

"I pray that the culprits and their families will have the decency to ask the forgiveness of their victims for the sake of their own spiritual health, for without forgiveness this incident will corrode their souls," he said.

Christ following in a google-age

This past week has been a busy one.  One thought reoccurred throughout.

The power of mysteries.

It all started when a group of friends celebrated a dear friend’s birthday.  The celebration stretched over three days on a farm.  During the second evening someone introduced the game “polar bear”.  It is a game wherein people have to figure out a riddle.  If you figure the game out, then you become a polar bear.

Games like this have the ability to pull people into a mystery and the struggle of figuring it out.  It also frustrates. If you’re out, then you desperately want to be in.  People who haven’t ‘figured it out’ try to pry the secrets from those who have become polar bears.  Some struggle till they figure it out.  Others want the cheap answer.

Another game was introduced. It is called, “Snap’s the name of the game”.  In this game two people sit opposite each other with a third person relaying a message to one of the pairs.  The third person whispers a name to one of the pairs and by using short snaps the name is relayed.  It is amazing to watch – kind of freaky.  The same dynamics apply to this game than the polar bear game.  People wrestle to get in, to find the answer.

So I did the unforgiveable.  When I came home from the weekend I searched Google to find the mystery behind the Snap game.  I found the answer – without struggle. It was information on a page, answer without struggle.

Cheap information provided the key to the mystery.  I have done this before.  In the old days when we played Kings’Quest and all the other Quest titles produced by Sierra one could download a ‘walkthru’ that solved the mysteries.  I sometimes did.

When I googled the answer to the snap game I experienced that familiar feeling of mastery.  I ‘got’ the answer – but felt ‘empty’.  Getting the answer without figuring it out produces a total different experience than struggling for the answer (what I did with the Polar Bear game and some Quest games) and then getting it.  Struggling for the answer is different than getting the answer.

Then on Wednesday someone who watched the “Snap’s game” asked me if I figured it out and I gave him my googled answer.  The two guys who showed him the game were ticked off at me.  I cheapened the game by giving away an answer without struggling for it myself and by passing it on to someone who didn’t wrestle for the answer either.

One of the most impactful books I’ve read for my thesis is Alan Kreider’s “The change of conversion and the origin of Christendom.”  In it he explains the process that led to people’s conversions before Constantine became emperor and Christianity became the state religion.

In the second chapter he describes “The intriguing Attraction of Early Christianity”[1].  He describes the early followers of Jesus as marginal, liminal, on the fringes and that they were described as “insane”.  He notes that,

“Despite disincentives, despite the scorn of the powerful, despite persecutions, the early Christian movement was growing. Something was deeply attractive to it.”[2]

He also described how the enemies of Christianity found them, “intriguing; they were rumor-worthy”[3].  These followers of Jesus exhibited “Question-Posing Behavior”[4].

Like the games we played over the weekend there was something about the early followers that had an aroma of secrecy, mystery and allure.  They had “Worship that Shapes an Attractive People”[5] – not because they had attractive worship services for non-believers were barred from portions of Christian services.  Kreider states that,

“If Christian worship did assist in the outreach of the churches, it did so incidently, as a by-product, by shaping the consciousness of the individual Christians and the character of their communities so that their lives – and their interaction with outsiders – would be attractive and question posing.”[6]

This kind of community was formed through an intensive process of conversion – it wasn’t a google-affair.  Kreider notes that,

“This could not happen quickly. It could come about only when candidates submitted themselves to a process of ‘resocialization’ by which their new community superintended the transformation of their beliefs, their sense of belonging, and their patterns of behavior.  No longer would they live by the values of the dominant society.  A process of examination, instruction, and ritual rehabituated the candidates for conversion, re-reflexing them into the lifestyle of an alternative community.”[7]

In order to play Polar Bear you are superintended by the Polar Bear explaining the game.  Under his watchful eye you have to prove by your behavior that you understand the game by giving the right answer three times in a row.  When you become a Polar Bear you don’t share cheaply! (Like the movie Fight Club).

As our community studies "The Lord’s Prayer" I was reminded by Ernst Conradie that The Lord’s prayer was part of the Early Church’s secret and mystery.  He writes that,

It should also be noted that, in the early church, the Lord's Prayer was prayed in secret during the liturgy. All non-members had to leave the liturgy before the prayer. The prayer was considered so radical, so dangerous, so undermining that it could only be prayed in secret: It called for the radically new world of God's reign.[8]

David Bosch quotes Jeremias who noted that,

“As one of the most holy treasures of the church, the Lord’s Prayer, together with the Lord’s supper, was reserved for full members, and it was not disclosed to those who stood outside.  It was a privilege to be allowed to pray it.”[9]

This sounds odd to us.  We live in a google-age.  An information-age.  How is this changing our Christianity?  Are we googling answers of secrets that we're not willing to struggle for? 

---

[1] Kreider, Alan 1999 “The change of conversion and the Origen of Christendom” p.10

[2] Ibid, p.10

[3] Ibid, p.11

[4] Ibid, p.12

[5] Ibid, p.14

[6] Ibid, p.14

[7] Ibid, p.21

[8] Conradie, Ernst 2005 “Mission as evangelism and as development? Some perspectives from the Lord’s prayer” : Internation review of mission 94:375

[9] David Bosch, “The Lord’s prayer: Paradigm for a Christian lifestyle” p.6

The Lord's prayer in South Africa - an introduction

I still remember standing in the long queue on the day South Africa celebrated OUR first democratic election.  It was my first vote.  What a privilege it was to cast it in that decisive moment.  But that was 15 years ago.

A lot has happened since then. A lot has not.

I am a follower of Jesus.  And when I look at the last fifteen years in my own journey with Jesus I woke from a terrible sleep - the sleep of racism, classism and segregation.

I have a dream of an integrated church in South Africa .

Recently I spoke to a group of community health workers who devote themselves to caring for the poor and destitute in Cosmo City and Utsoseng.

Together we explored the most explosive prayer ever prayed.  It is the Lord’s Prayer.  During our conversation I asked them a simple question, “If a white person has personally asked you for forgiveness for what happened during apartheid please raise your hand.” 

Out of sixteen people two raised their hands. 

We are fragmented.

Our “Rainbow nation” has a bank of clouds above it obscuring the rainbow. 

But there is hope. 

This hope, I and a few other friends believe, is to be found in Jesus.  In following Him we believe there is redemption for the oppressed and the oppressors in South Africa.  We believe that we can reclaim a shared humanity and become whole again.  We are sure that this will not be easy.  We know that we will make a lot of mistakes.  We know that it will take time.  We know that some will dismiss our dream as idealistic or fanciful.  We know that people from the oppressor and the oppressed camp will critique us. 

We know.

But we are willing to engage, to learn, to put ourselves out there.

We dream about a new humanity in South Africa. 

We dream of an “OUR” that crosses racial, ethnic, economic and religious boundaries.

We believe that Jesus can help us through what he has done and what He still does.  Together we want to explore the prayer he taught us to pray – for in it we find a rhythm of reality that can help us become a new OUR.  In this series of reflections we will work through the Lord’s Prayer.  We want to challenge you to gather in groups of at least four and not bigger than twelve.  We believe that the exploration of this prayer will be most fruitful in diverse groups.  Women and men, black and white, rich and poor, English and Afrikaans, Xhosa and Zulu, Sotho and Shangaan … you get the idea.

Here is the prayer of Jesus … Take some time to pray it out loud …

Our Father in heaven,

Hallowed be your name,

Your kingdom come,

Your will be done

On earth as it is in heaven.

Give us today our daily bread.

Forgive us our debts,

As we also have forgiven our debtors.

And lead us not into temptation,

But deliver us from the evil one.

For your is the kingdom and

The power  and the glory forever.

Amen.

Thank you Tayla! What my child taught me this week ...

Have you ever played a part in a drama?  Have you been part of a story?  Have you felt the excitement of being part of something, something that placed you in a company of people doing something worthwhile?  Tayla, our four-year-old daughter, has all of the above in her life.

For the last few months she has been preparing for her school concert and it is taking over her life.  She is preparing for a performance, but the boundary between the preparation and the performance has blurred.  She performs before the performance.  It is beautiful to watch.  Every day she refers to songs, stories and moments that remind her of the concert.  She recites, retells and connects her life with the concert – it has become a narrative that brings cohesion and sense to her life.

Yesterday, on our way to school, she made a statement that echoes in the corridors of my soul.  She looked at me and said, “Daddy – when you mommy and Liam (her brother) come and watch the concert, you must hold fast onto Liam because he will want to join us in the concert.”

Tayla knows the magnetic power of being part of a story.  She knows that Liam will see a performance that will draw him into something. She knows that the story will pull him into participation into the act.

The same day I had this experience with Tayla, I read the author’s note in Don Miller’s new book about stories.  He writes,

"If you watched a movie about a guy who wanted a Volvo and worked for years to get it, you wouldn't cry at the end when he drove off the lot, testing the windshield wipers. You wouldn't tell your friends you saw a beautiful movie or go home and put a record on to think about the story you'd seen. The truth is, you wouldn't remember that movie a week later, except you'd feel robbed and want your money back. Nobody cries at the end of a movie about a guy who wants a Volvo. But we spend years actually living those stories, and expect our lives to feel meaningful. The truth is, if what we choose to do with our lives won't make a story meaningful, it won't make a life meaningful either."

Paulo Freire writes that,

“Education is suffering from narration sickness”.[1]

I think he is right, I also think that the church is suffering from narration sickness. We lack localized inspirational stories.  We need the kind of stories that will pull Liam unto the stage. We miss these kind of stories.

Not because these stories are not out there.  We miss these stories because we are fascinated by the stories created by the advertising world’s storytellers.

We are allowing ourselves to be trained by the media to miss the behind-the-scenes stories that are changing the world. In our midst! 

Christian communities have the glorious work to retrain people to recognize and live significant stories. 

This will take courage. 

Churches are used to either living vicariously through their pastors (by outsourcing their stories for his/her stories) or through the stories their pastors tell about other people (by modeling without following). We have to live a worthwhile story – we cannot just become voyeurs of other people’s stories.  Churches, like school concerts, are supposed to pull people into training and performing kingdom stories. These performance should be more than just what happens on the stage at the concert. Like Tayla the boundary must become blurred.  The story is supposed to be a magnetic pulse pulling us into rhythms of the songs, stories and remembering – Monday to Saturday.

CS Lewis wrote,

We know that we can act and that our actions produce results. Everyone who believes in God must therefore admit … that God has not chosen to write the whole of history with His own hand. Most of the events that go on in the universe are indeed out of our control, but not all. It is like a play in which the scene and the general outline of the story is fixed by the author, but certain minor details are left for the actors to improvise. [2] 

The church are called to infuse these 'improvisations' with more than living the message of the advertising stories, stories which mostly will have a short-term excitement with a long-term price to pay.  We need better stories. Repent for the kingdom of God is at hand is, for me, the ultimate story.  And you?

---

[1] Pedagogy of the oppressed, p.52

[2] Work and Prayer, CS Lewis “Essay collection” – p.161

Paulo Freire for South Africa - some reflections

As followers of Jesus we affirm the humanity of all.  In the words of Irenaues, “Man fully alive is the glory of God”.  Freire see our vocation as humanization – helping people to become fully human; this includes the oppressed and the oppressor. 

In order for the oppressed and the oppressor to become a new humanity, a “third way” has to be explored.  This way is a different space than the ones occupied by the oppressor and the oppressed.  It therefore, looks different than the lives of the white oppressors and of the black oppressed in our post-Apartheid South Africa. 

Freire comments that the dehumanization of the oppressed will have some concrete effects,

Because it is a distortion of being more fully human, sooner or later being less human leads the oppressed to struggle against those who made them so. In order for this struggle to have meaning, the oppressed must not in seeking to regain their humanity (which is a way to create it), become in turn oppressors of the oppressors, but rather restorers of the humanity of both.

In our post- Apartheid South Africa the beneficiaries of Apartheid and the oppressed of Apartheid are both dehumanized.  Both parties need restoration.  Freire boldly states that the oppressed has the challenge to struggle against the oppressors in such a way that they:

     -  Don’t become like the oppressors.

     -  Restores the humanity of their oppressors!

He states it bluntly,

This, then, is the great humanistic and historical task of the oppressed: to liberate themselves and their oppressors as well. The oppressors, who oppress, exploit, and rape by virtue of their power; cannot find in this power the strength to liberate either the oppressed or themselves. Only power that springs from the weakness of the oppressed will be sufficiently strong to free both. Any attempt to “soften” the power of the oppressor in deference to the weakness of the oppressed almost always manifests itself in the form of false generosity; indeed, the attempt never goes beyond this. In order to have the continued opportunity to express their “generosity,” the oppressors must perpetuate injustice as well. An unjust social order is the permanent fount of this “generosity” which is nourished by death, despair, and poverty. That is why the dispensers of false generosity become desperate at the slightest threat to its source.

There is a difference between true and false generosity.  False generosity is a kind of giving that gives goods that are received through oppression and through current injustices.  The “fount” is unjust.  It takes what belongs to the poor and then gives a portion back, and then calls it generosity.  The church Father Basil the Great identified this kind of generosity when he once challenges his church saying that what they are giving away as charity is what they stole in the first place.  Basil showed them how “false” their generosity was.

True generosity happens when the sources of injustice are challenged.  In Freire’s words,

True generosity consists precisely in fighting to destroy the causes which nourish false charity. False charity constrains the fearful and subdued, the “rejects of life” to extend their trembling hands. True generosity lies in striving so that these hands — whether of individuals or entire peoples — need be extended less and less in supplication, so that more and more they become human hands which work and, working, transform the world.

In my humble opinion, this false generosity is at the heart of most outreach in churches (and a lot of time myself).

The oppressed cannot identify these “causes which nourish false charity”.  It has to be identified by the oppressed. 

In plain language- a group of beneficiaries of Apartheid cannot sit in an all-white discussion and identify how to be truly generous.  The main reason why we cannot do this, is because our rationalizations for our false generosity are shared rationalizations.  Years of collective rationalizations have become so common-sense for us, that it would take outsiders to puncture our paradigms.

The rich, beneficiaries of Apartheid have to become students.  We have to become apprentices of the poor. We have to listen. Learn.  Freire describes it,

“This lesson and this apprenticeship must come, however, from the oppressed themselves …”

Yet, this apprenticeship will not come by chance.  It will come through a decision of the oppressed themselves.  They have to decide that they have an enormous role to play.[1] 

But what do we do when thousands of our black brothers and sisters believe that they don’t have a role to play?  When their self-image have been destroyed to such an extent that they can see no way forward? Do they know how desperately we need them to teach and show us?

[1] “They will not gain this liberation by chance but through the praxis of their quest for it, through their recognition of the necessity to fight for it.”

 

When Jesus points something out - church discipline in postmodern culture

As I mentioned in a previous post, our community has gone through the hardship of church discipline. Postmodern communities battle with this part of Jesus' teachings.  Posted below is an extract of a study I prepared for Claypot on Jesus' teachings in Matthew 18.  This part explores where Jesus teaches us that,

“If your brother sins (against you), go to him and show him his fault. But do it privately, just between yourselves. If he listens to you, you have won your brother back.

Why should we "GO" and point out the sin?

We have been taught that when you point a finger at someone, three fingers point back at you.  There is truth to this statement.  Yet, there is also something about this idiom that can create a kind of Christianity wherein we don’t help each other to become more like Christ. 

Because three fingers are pointing back to us, it doesn’t mean that the other finger doesn’t have something pointing at!  If we use this kind of thinking then we will simply not grow into people who are becoming more like Jesus, we won’t address our three fingers and also not the issue that the other one is pointing to.

The intent of the idiom is to make one aware of the danger of a judgmental attitude (judgmentalism).  It is not an idiom designed to never “point out the fault” (judging). 

We should remember that it is Jesus commanding us to “GO” and point out the fault.  Some people have created a picture of Jesus that is so loving and forgiving that they are scandalized to even think that Jesus could be so ‘judging’.  They serve a different Jesus than the Jesus described in the Bible.

The idiom about the fingers doesn’t exist in the Bible (although in the same chapter Jesus talks about a striving against sin that goes so far as to cut of your hands and feet and pluck out your eye – Matthew 18:8-9).

What we do find is Jesus’ clear instructions in Matthew 7:1-5,

" “Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbor, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye." (Matthew 7:1-5, NRSV)

Craig Blomberg explains these verses,

“Judge” (krino) can imply to analyze or evaluate as well as to condemn or avenge. The former senses are clearly commanded of believers (e.g., 1 Cor 5:5; 1 John 4:1), but the latter are reserved for God.  Even on those occasions when we render a negative evaluation of others, our purposes should be constructive and not retributive. So Jesus is here commanding his followers not to be characterized by judgmental attitudes … But v.5 makes clear that vv. 3-4 do not absolve us of responsibility to our brothers and sisters in Christ.  Rather, once we have dealt with our own sins, we are then in a position gently and lovingly to confront and try to restore others who have erred.”[1]

The danger is that we buy into a “who am I to judge?” mentality because we are unwilling to be shown our faults.  We then use the “who am I to judge” language so that we can rationalize our own sins.  We move from “who am I to judge?” to “who are you to judge?” This attitude will not help us and others grow into the image of Jesus. Jesus calls us to work on our log and then to take out the speck in your brother's eye.

Therefore, when we go “to point out the fault” we should do it with humility and “speak the truth in love (Eph 4:15)”.  The best way to do this is to open your own life to the receiving end of Matthew 18:15[2].  We should all exercise our ability to “listen” to others when they show us our fault(s).[3]

The acknowledgement that I am also a work in progress gives me the right attitude to “GO” in humility (Galatians 6:1).  If I’m not willing to receive then I can easily become a judgmental “go-er”.

In the Psalms we read a prayer that shows openness towards people coming to me in order to “show my faults”.

Read the prayer out loud and reflect whether you are open to have people “GO” to you? – How does this prayer make you feel?  What are you afraid of? What possibilities do you see?

"Let the righteous strike me; let the faithful correct me. Never let the oil of the wicked anoint my head, for my prayer is continually against their wicked deeds." (Psalm 141:5, NRSV)

Although we should beware of a judgmental attitude, it is severely irresponsible to not “GO” and point out the fault of someone who sinned against you or who is sinning in general.  This attitude, though it seems loving, shows a disregard for a family member’s relationship with God.  We have a responsibility towards one another.  Already in the Old Testament God challenges Israel’s tendency to just let someone be,

"You shall not hate in your heart anyone of your kin; you shall reprove your neighbor, or you will incur guilt yourself." (Leviticus 19:17, NRSV)

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in his book “Life Together”, touches on how our relationship with God and our brothers and sisters cannot ignore the words of Jesus in Matthew 18:15-20.  Read the two quotes provided and write your responses to them down,

 “Reproof is unavoidable. God’s Word demands it when a brother falls into open sin.  The practice of discipline in the congregation begins in the smaller circles. Where defection from God’s Word in doctrine or in life imperils the family fellowship and with it the whole congregation, the word of admonition and rebuke must be ventured.  Nothing can be more cruel than the leniency which abandons others to their sin. Nothing can be more compassionate than the severe reprimand which calls another Christian in one’s community back from the path of sin.

 When another Christian falls into obvious sin, an admonition is imperative, because God’s Word demands it. The practice of discipline in the community of faith begins with friends who are close to one another. Words of admonition and reproach must be risked.”[4]

This responsibility towards one another is one of the reasons why the Jesus life, and specifically church life is such a radical departure from our culture.[5]  We are members of one another.  If we disregard this process in our churches, then we’re becoming a club and not a community of people striving to become more likes Jesus. Even if this idea sounds hectic to our postmodern ears, it is the call of Jesus.[6]

At Claypot, we engage in this mutual encouragement through our accountability relationships.  These friendships are places where we can encourage one another to “love and good works”(Hebrews 10:23).  If these relationships remain shallow places of patting one another on the back, then we won’t be that different than the social clubs in Johannesburg.

---

[1] Craig Blomberg, “Matthew: The new American Commentary” – p.127,128

[2] Thiselton asks, “If judgematalism breeds one type of complacency, and overtolerance breeds another, how do we try to steer a safe course between the two? When does a church become a social club for mutual entertainment and self-affirmation” p.87

[3] “The more we learn to allow others to speak the Word to us, to accept humbly and gratefully even severe reproaches and admonitions, the more free and objective will we be in speaking ourselves. The person whose touchiness and vanity make him spurn a brother’s earnest censure cannot speak the truth in humility to others; he is afraid of being rebuffed and of feeling that he has been aggrieved.” Bonhoeffer, p.106

[4] “Life Together”, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p.107

[5] The world’s pattern is to look out for oneself primarily, but all that we do within the community of faith will impact everyone else. Thus, it should be a high value within the community to develop a pattern of life in which all disciples are committed to living out our responsibility to each other’s purity. Wilkins, Michael J. “Bridging Contexts” In NIV Application Commentary, New Testament: Matthew. By Michael J. Wilkins, 627. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, © 2004.

[6] Christians form a community, a real community of sinful persons who have become attached to God through Christ and in the Spirit, and their community is their new life. They must live responsibly before God in freedom but with accountability to one another. Scot McKnight

Claypot happenings

The last 6 weeks have been some of the toughest in the six years since we’ve planted Claypot.  There are two reasons for this.  Firstly, we are in the midst of a massive change to the rhythm we follow as a community.  Secondly, we are going through a very painful process where one of our families has been ripped apart by a divorce.  We also had to deal with church discipline – which is tough for a group of postmodern Jesus people (more about this in a later post).

Our new rhythm

When we started Claypot in 2003 we wanted to rediscover Jesus and what it means to be church.  One of the phrases we used was, “we want to discover church as a verb, not just a noun”.  We had a deep sense that church should be more than just a Sunday.  Amazing new verb-like imaginative rhythms developed over the last few years.  Yet, having church on a Sunday has still not been dislodged from our institutional memories. 

We are also such a transient community that we usually only have a third of our community in Johannesburg over the weekend.  This has challenged our continuity, especially in communication.

So after six years of teaching that church is not just on a Sunday (ironically on a Sunday) we have decided to place a moratorium on the Sunday worship service.  Instead, we will have Wednesday/Thursday groups working together on what it would mean to continue further on the journey that started in 2003 (a kind of rebooting).

Instead of gathering on Sundays in a formal manner, we want to use the opened space as an opportunity for Claypot to rediscover Sabbath on a Sunday.  To imaginatively create rhythms wherein we can pray, play and pause without the burden of church activities.  We will come together once a month for a joint time of fellowship where we tell stories, sing and have communion together.

As you can imagine, this has created quite a stir in our community.  Through dozens of pastoral conversations with the elders, the community is on the verge of walking into a different rhythm – starting this week.

On Wednesday and Thursdays we will focus on three areas:

• -       Engaging with Jesus in our South African context.
• -       Rediscovering church as a verb.
• -       Becoming a multicultural community.

      We’re praying that it would help us to love God and others more.