«
»

drawing lines

I have the pleasure of being part of quite an interesting cohort. While I imagine (and based of my experiences at a second cohort I’ve been to a few times) most cohorts are, at least theologically, progressive in nature, several of the attendees at the cohort I’m a part of are more conservative in nature. Part of that is likely due to the local, a suburban setting in a fairly affluent area, and part of that is certainly the prevailing theological thought of the south. Whatever the cause is, the effect it has on our conversations is incredibly interesting, and hopefully beneficial to all those involved.

Since the cohort is brand new, the current dicussion relvolves around the four “Values” held common by “emergents,” through a long and winding series of topics, our discussion last night turned to “Lines of in/exclusion.” If you’ve been reading the EV Blog of late, you’ll notice that this topic has come up a couple times there as well (although what the lines were being drawn over/around were different than what we were discussing last night). My question after a few minutes of “debate” last night was “Do we even need lines?”

In my estimation, Jesus was notorious for making those around him rethink the lines they had so adamantely drawn. While you could argue Jesus drew lines when he spoke of those acting justly being cause for eternal life, and acting injustly being cause for eternal death, he spent far more time erasing or  blurring lines than he does creating them. So then, as followers of Jesus, should our goal be the continuation of lines, say in the realm of “These people are evil and have no soul,” or the blurring/erasing of lines (These are people, beloved by God, and to be loved by us)? Should we be more concerned, or concerned at all, with these lines of in/exclusion which Jesus never told us to draw? Or should be more/only concerned with following the two-in-one commandment(s) we were given, “To love God and love your neighbor as yourself”?

Are lives ever beneficial? Probably. Are they both not useful and nigh on harmful more often than not? Yes. Do I think Jesus wants us going around drawing lines and defining who’s in and who’s out? No, not at all, not ever. Will I probably continue to be a hypocrite and draw lines from time to time? Oh yeah.

Thoughts?

email2friend

This entry was posted Wednesday, May 13th, 2009 at 11:37 am and is filed under conversation, emergent, religion. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • Thank you all for your responses, I'm really didn't think this topic would bring out so many varied opinions (looking back, I probably should have foreseen it). I'll have another another post on this topic (certainly influenced by all of your responses) in the next couple of days.
  • Derek F.
    I know I'm jumping in late here (just got back from my Honeymoon), and I don't have time to make a really adequate post, but I wanted to chime in.

    First off, I'm glad you're alright Matt! The first thing I said to Jeanie when she logged into facebook when we got back last night was, "Could you check Matt Scott's profile? I want to make sure he didn't die while we were gone." I'm glad to see you're still alive and kicking! lol

    As for the idea of drawing lines, I'd rather not use that term since it's tied up with so many modern notions of Christian Legalism. In the sense that we think of that term, no, Jesus didn't draw lines. He wasn't interested in lines. But he was interested in Holiness. This is something that I think a lot of Christians today are taking less and less seriously. I believe the idea that God cares about our personal integrity is losing its relevance to today's young Christian. Jesus was a Jew who affirmed the Law (Matt. 5:17-20). Jesus was interested in blurring the lines that the Jewish scribes and polity had added to the Law, yes, but to suggest that Jesus simply wanted to obliterate the distinctions between believers and unbelievers is unwarranted. Jesus redefines what Holiness means.

    It was Jesus who said that it would be those who do his will that will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, and others who do not will not enter. Our generation thinks in such pragmatic terms that I think we start to wonder what the point is of not cussing, or sexual purity, or affirming that Jesus is Savior and no other, or remaining sober, or whatever amounts to "lines" in many people's lines. But, first of all, I think it requires a whole epistemological shift in our thinking to understand things like this. Secondly, I don't think it's usefulness can be explained in empirical terms. It's something that has to be experienced. And we're generally not ok with that. Give me a specimen; something to hold and touch; let me see it with my eyes--you can't comprehend Holiness like that. I personally believe the crux of the debate over "lines" has more to do with the meaning of Holiness.
  • Thanks for the thoughts/concerns/prayers over the past couple weeks, they were/are greatly appreciated. I felt terrible for missing your wedding, but I was still adjusting to the meds, so I wasn't certain if I'd be able to sit through the wedding and reception w/o nausea or any of that stuff. You did miss an ER trip while you guys were gone (had a reaction to the meds that made me vomit for 8 hours), but nothing else on that front.

    On another note, you missed some great conversation at the cohort on Tuesday and we certainly missed having your voice in the mix. Looking forward to having you back with us next month.
  • If we fail to draw lines, bad things eventually follow. Some of the recent woes of the Catholic church being sued for damages for child abuse arise because bishops declined to draw lines and say that some activities were incompatible with being a priest - or indeed, incompatible with the law.

    I think that Jesus had plenty to say about inclusion and exclusion, about judging sin - and about accepting the repentant, too. He did indeed blur the lines people thought were clear, and point to a wholly different set of values than the legalistic ones his hearers tended to assume. We seem to need to re-learn those values in every generation.

    My approach to such things tends to be a bit like my approach to absolute truth: I'm inclined to think that there are indeed absolutes, but that we in all our brokenness can never grasp the whole of it. So we need to approach such questions with humility and grace - more concerned for people's health and wholeness than for doctrinal purity. But that can't preclude there being lines, and knowing, at least sometimes, when they've been crossed
  • Great Conversation, Keep it up, gang.
  • Tristan
    Hi Matt I'm glad you're feeling better. While I don't have any clue what cohort is or about, I agree with the idea that Jesus blurred the lines of the religion of the day. Jesus was a troublemaker, and I like that about him. I also agree that as Christians(which is a term that is often misused), it is our job to love and accept the sinner and not the sin in their lives. That being said, all I know is that it is often easier said that done. Who are we to say what is acceptable when we are all flawed individuals? The best we can do is follow the guidelines set before us and be good witnesses to others, which is something I personally struggle with.
  • Cathy Anderson
    Matt - I'm loving the oddity of our cohort, too. Thanks for the thoughtful summary.
  • Larry McDonald
    Matt:

    Thanks for the gracious way you have affirmed mine and other’s “conservative” contribution to the cohort. The ironic thing is that most of my friends would consider me anything but conservative, yet it’s all a matter of “compared to what” (in fact, many of them pray regularly for me in the hope that I don’t slide down that slippery liberal slope…)

    I absolutely agree with you that Jesus came to “rend the curtain”, and dispel many of the “lines” the Jewish leaders had put in place to oppress the people. He came to share “good news” that redemption and reconciliation is at hand here and now. But I do not think that he came to eliminate all lines of distinction—just redraw them around him. In order for any to be “in Christ” it means that some will choose not to be. Anyone can purpose to adhere to the tenants of Jesus (i.e. follow his way of living life), and in doing so will hopefully do good and have a positive effect on the world—and I’m all for that, Amen.

    But for those that choose to abide in him, to submit to his lordship in their life, to worship and love him, they “get” things that those who merely follow his life style do not. They get the Spirit of God dwelling in them and a relationship with the creator of the universe that is uniquely fulfilling. Those who merely adopt his “way” but not him leave behind the best part of the deal! Jesus wants all of us, and all of us have the opportunity to press in to all God has to offer. But there is a line out there that by the very nature of our choice separates us. For me it’s not a matter of “in(ees) and out(ees)”, it’s a matter of “get to experience it all(ees)” and “choose to settle for something less(ees)”. That’s why I encourage everyone I know to take God up on his advice and “choose (abundant) life”…found only in the person of Jesus Christ.


  • Gregg
    Larry:

    I appreciate your presence and your right to hold to your lines. There was a time when I held similar positions. But I find the Holy Spirit at work in a lot of people who don't buy into the idea of Lord. They would say they are following the Way of Jesus. They also find messages of Truth and love and grace in people and in writings outside of Christianity. I want to walk in the Way of Jesus so that people are drawn to a message of light and love that is transformational. But I don't find Jesus ever putting a line around what that transformation looks like.
  • Here's one of my favorite little poems. I thought about sharing it at the Cohort last night:

    He drew a circle that shut me out—
    Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
    But love and I had the wit to win:
    We drew a circle that took him in.

    - Charles Edwin Markham (1852-1940)
  • Jeff Straka
    The only time I can think of where Jesus "drew any lines" himself was the story of the adulterous woman brought before Jesus (John 8:1-11). As the teachers and Pharisees were trying to show Jesus how "outside the lines" this woman was, Jesus bent down to (perhaps) demonstrate how these same lines would convict them as well!

    Lines are essentially a product of our ego. Our egocentric mind needs to show how we are "above" another, BETTER than another. Jesus' mind/way is completely free of the ego. When we love God and love others AS ourselves, how CAN there be any lines? If I love God, myself and others all EQUALLY, we are ALL in the circle and have no use for lines!

    I, too, find the diversity of our cohort incredibly invigorating!
  • I think it may be part of the human condition to naturally want to create lines and boundaries. And yes, I suppose that is a good thing up to a certain point. But as with anything we tend to take this too far to the point of ostracizing others and creating full blown systems of domination and oppression. I love that saying by Mother Teresa: "The problem with the world is that we draw the circle of our family too small." So I agree with you. I think we draw lines enough by nature, we need to spend more time -- like Jesus -- expanding and erasing them.
blog comments powered by Disqus
ramblings-theology-my thoughts