data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/320d8/320d831c7e7cf08d86f52b012ae9ebd7fec0d7e3" alt=""
In Katie and I’s search for a church home, I have kept this passage in mind to help us discern exactly where we should commit our time and resources to. Our search has not been easy, indeed we have to struggle against the temptation of sleeping in and going to the farmer’s market down the street instead of attending churches. I have found that my enthusiasm waxes and wanes in this attempt. When we do decide to go and then we discover how a place doesn’t feel right, or a theology is a little too out of whack for our liking, it seems to set the search back for a week or so. In this post I want to unpack this Cavanaugh passage and help shed some light on just what we are looking for.
I am fascinated and convicted by the thought that the church does not have a monopoly on the workings of the Holy Spirit. I don’t take this idea to necessarily mean The Holy Spirit, but a more general idea of God’s exertion of grace upon our world. I have been guilty of thinking that the Church is the super-structure end all of all ends for the World’s ills before, but I think that ultimately leads to an impoverished community of believers. I still believe that, I think, but the idea needs to be prefaced with the very important “not yet”. As Christians we must struggle with the knowledge that we are paradoxically already transformed into the new creation, while at the same time we are the broken and hapless community in need of much grace and patience. If we are indeed not so hapless, I would think that this whole eschatologic moment would have come a lot sooner. So if the church must negotiate with other voices, and perhaps even contain voices that can carry the whispers of God’s grace in our world, what does that look like? Surely there must be a very bare-bones sub-set of beliefs that one must in some way subscribe to in order to bear the witness of Christian. I don’t like muddled pluralism, but I don’t like rigid sects either. Can the church contain anti-Christ elements? Does the church incorporate the Truth’s of God’s grace outside of it in the same manner as the plundering of Egypt’s riches? Or perhaps the idea that the church is made of the world is very important here. Perhaps subscribing to Christianity is a continual act that can never stick for good. Perhaps there is so much of the world in those who profess the witness of the Church that our subscriptions and memberships are never enough to fully separate ourselves from even the world inside of us. If I interpret that passage as something to be applied personally and inter-church, it can certainly work, although it does sound as if the hope the Church has to offer the world is very muddled indeed.
This reminds me of the idea of Carnival. The saints are always sinners of a sort, and the sinners are always saints of a sort, and in the Carnival revelry, we are exposed as the “already-but-not-yet” hope of for the World. Although we are exposed as the corpus permixtum that we are, our hope is also reified by the act of switching places. When the Kings are made into fools, and the fools into Kings, when the Sinners are made into saints and the saints into sinners, we are reminded, by the sinners who play saints, that we are actually saints of a sort, and we must bear witness as best we can.
1 comment:
Thanks for the post, and thanks also for the initiative to keep posting even when the rest of us have backslidden (?) from our work ethic to keep writing.
I think you are right, we have to allow for the grace to bear the sinners amongst us, just as we should hope to borne by the rest when we inevitably sin again. (Borne? Backslidden? Sorry, my past participles aren't coming out comfortably today.) Jesus teaches us not to judge the wheat from the weeds, because we never know when what we think to be weeds might some day mature and turn out to be wheat all along.
But this is tricky. We still have to discern and hold the church to its calling, to make sure the church is being the church and we retain some semblance of being a Spirited people. Otherwise we will not be a blessing to ourselves nor to the greater polis. "What good is salt if it loses its saltiness", yadayadayada. I think the problem is we've expected conformity and allowed for grace on the wrong issues. I don't think a lot of churches know how to accept difference when it comes to competing worldviews in the same community. But yet we allow too much grace when it comes to wealth distribution (my own humble suspicion). No one likes to call out the billionaire church member who isn't tithing enough. He is entitled to his difference, and we can't presume to infringe upon it in the name of church unity. But we feel like we probably could if he were espousing problematic theological opinions during a Bible study.
And I think the problem there is, Cavanaugh would say, we've sold out our ethic to the greater (dominant) polis's. We've ceased to discern the issues the way the church should, and instead traffic in upper-middle class American values and let those rule the day. Ultimately we have to get our own ethic right if we ever hope to be a blessing to ourselves and to the world.
Post a Comment