More often than not, critics of the emerging church smack the “liberal” label on those engaging the questions of today. While I believe looking at political beliefs there’s a tendency towards liberal thoughts in some areas, the liberal versus conservative angle is not the best framing for the emerging church. Right versus left just doesn’t neatly classify most of us.
A better way to look at emerging churchers (and this obviously won’t work for every one) would be to couch our beliefs in terms of freedom versus oppression. Our concern for social justice issues stems not from a political mindset but from a recognition of oppression. The reason Darfur is a prominent subject among many emerging church bloggers is the oppression going on.
And if some of us are not pro-Bush, the issue may have less to do with typical right versus left issues and more to do with a belief that Bush’s regime oppresses voices which run counter to the Bush agenda. It may be that while we believe democracy is the best form of government, we do not believe any form of government should be forced upon a nation. It is a form of oppression to force even a good thing on persons who do not want it or ask for it (or willing to fight for it themselves).
And what about Scripture? Aren’t we in the emerging church just a bunch of wanna be liberal theologians? I think what gets to most of us about the “conservative” scholars isn’t so much the content of what they believe as the way they force their interpretations on others. It is another form of oppression, and we seek for freedom from the tyranny of conservative scholars (not all included, but the group as a whole tend towards a form of absolutism that silences competing voices).
Because of unhealthy and prudish views on sex, we’ve become more open to questions about sexuality. It’s not that we want the “liberal” answer, but that we are looking for answers to be had without the force of guilt and social stigma declaring what is right and wrong with our sexuality.
Of course, most conservatives think any one is a liberal who does not line up with their conservatism. But at least for me, when I’m labeled a liberal… I’m just going to try to explain that it isn’t a liberal agenda driving my thoughts, it’s an agenda of freedom from oppression. If Christ’s yoke is easy and his burden is light, then perhaps that Christ’s agenda as well.
I think that as a christian we should transcend right/wrong or liberal/conserative thinkings…
Liberals think about doing good things, yet don’t always follow through by doing the right thing…
Conservatives do the right thing… even if it is not good.
Too much charity leads to welfare states. not enough leads to revolutions and uprise.
I view politics as a Christian to do good, by the power of God. This seems to overide the right/left thinking. Though I found sometimes it does not look “right” it is still good. Check out the good samaritian story in the Bible.
It is sometimes hard as we must not confuse worldly politics with heavenly poitics. Yet, striving do do good, politics of power and greed and such seem so unimportant.
I hope that makes some sense… sometimes working thought into a coherant sentence is a bit hard concerning the heart.
BTW: I have been really enjoying the podcast. Though I may not agree with you on certain issues I will say you have some of the clearest and most thought views on a “just war” that I have come acrossed.
Blessings,
iggy
iggy
September 8th, 2005
Alan,
“Comparing the situation in Iraq to slavery is ludicrous.” it is not ludicrous when you end with the statement “(or willing to fight for it themselves). I could use the comparison of our liberation of france in WWII or the Jews faceing the gas chamber also”. as for, “If this administration were really about freeing the oppressed, they’d be looking to Darfur and other areas of the world where the people really do want the help of the West.” What people? Certainly not those that are in power and creating the havoc. In the same way the kurds and others in Iraq have wanted and needed the help of the west for decades.This administration is not about freeing the oppressed as much as the fighting of terrerist enemies that threaton the US. And “I’m not condoning what was going on in Iraq,” I think you are…if you would rather have continued to ignore it and have sudam continue his tyrany.” And, “but when you force democracy on a people, you better be careful. Sooner rather than later their democratic government will elect anti-US lawmakers and the situation will degrade quickly.” Unfortunately, you are right…this is the chance we take, but what other choice do we have?
as for your paragraph on sexuality I apologize if I misread it , but looking back at it I think it leaves itself open to draw the conclusion I Did.
Thank you
Mark
Mark Cyr
July 19th, 2005
“If Christ’s yoke is easy and his burden is light, then perhaps that Christ’s agenda as well.”
Good point, but it’s worth considering that Christ’s yoke is easy and his burden light when we take up his yoke and set aside the yoke of the world. We’re bound for pain if we try to bear both.
To make it clearer what I’m trying to say, Jesus is pretty unequivocal that whatever our thoughts on adultery and marriage, God’s standards are higher. Adultery happens first in the mind. Divorce was never intended, only allowed as an accomodation to our hard hearts. If we think that there are boundaries on sexuality that are somehow loose and subject to creative interpretation, then you have to deal with why Jesus would speak so forcefully about marriage, adultery and divorce.
I don’t believe that Jesus’s yoke being light has anything to do with his permissiveness. I believe that it means that a life surrendered to him has a pleasant peace to it that a life spent trying to pursue both sin and God cannot possibly have.
Peace, bro! Keep up the good work.
Kevin
July 22nd, 2005
i agree with your thoughts on the freedom thing. we fear freedom.
tammy
July 18th, 2005
Ryan -
I agree with a lot of what you said, though I’m not sure liberal should equal democrat either. I don’t think the “liberal” label is equal to a political philosophy of big government, though I realize that’s prevalent among liberals. Personally, I think on a practical level the goverment runs better on republican politics (in general, not basing on one leader’s agenda) but republicans fail to take into account… well reality. The republican mindset is that if you make something possible on a theoretical level, you’ve done your job. They tend not to consider class struggle and assume that opportunity is really available to all… when it’s only available on a theoretical level. Sure, it’s possible, but when you are enmeshed in an environment where no one knows how to take hold of the opportunity, you probably won’t be the exception to the rule and break out of your situation. While Democrats on the other hand I think understand class struggle, their solutions in my opinion are all wrong.
Mark – Comparing the situation in Iraq to slavery is ludicrous. If this administration were really about freeing the oppressed, they’d be looking to Darfur and other areas of the world where the people really do want the help of the West. I’m not condoning what was going on in Iraq, but when you force democracy on a people, you better be careful. Sooner rather than later their democratic government will elect anti-US lawmakers and the situation will degrade quickly.
And as far as you being prudish… I didn’t go into enough detail for you to assume I meant your views, as I don’t even know what they are. As soon as I talk about being open to the sexuality discussion, people tend to assume I’m open to any answers whatsoever. That seems to be what you’ve done. If you re-read the brief paragraph I wrote on sexuality, you’d see that I really didn’t say much of anything as to my position. Except that I want to see the answers not come out of a prudish mindset that uses guilt and shame to push its agenda. A mindset that until very recently (and certainly continues in some circles) makes persons feel sex is bad all together. So young men and women go into marriage not knowing how to deal with their sex life, because sex has always been seen as something bad.
Tammy – What do you mean by we fear freedom?
Anonymous
July 18th, 2005
You’re right that the emergent movement shouldn’t be couched in liberal/conservative terms; we should so easily accept the world’s boxes.
But what does liberalism offer as as a solution to poverty and injustice anyway? Money and government. I know so many Christians who have become Democrats because they care about social justice issues. But I don’t think Jesus would advocate this giving to Caesar what is God’s. We’ve become such a politicized society. In the 19th Century, revival for evangelicals meant an increase in Christian charities–working in prisons, opening up orphanages, etc. Now we are very pleased with ourselves when we support liberal politicians and attend a free Live 8 concert.
The most compassionate, charitable, kind-hearted, justice-focused people I know are stauch conservatives. They put their love into other people–instead of whoring it out to institutions (something Emergs should applaud).
Ryan
July 17th, 2005
“It may be that while we believe democracy is the best form of government, we do not believe any form of government should be forced upon a nation. It is a form of oppression to force even a good thing on persons who do not want it or ask for it (or willing to fight for it themselves).” I suppose the slaves of the south had freedom forced upon them by the Lincoln regime of the north? When the oppressed does not have the ability to defend or fight for their own freedom it is the christians responibility to stand up and yes even fight for it, even if it is not popular.
And does my Biblical view on sex being a wonderful gift given for the pleasure and the creating of children for a married man and his wife or a married woman and her husband make me a prude? That is something I have never been called before?
Mark Cyr
July 17th, 2005