[why not choose love?]

From Carl Greg's post “Why Not Choose Love? Picking and Choosing Scripture as a Twenty-first Century Christian"

Progressive Christians are sometimes accused of “picking and choosing” Bible verses for their own convenience. But I would invite you to consider that, upon close inspection, all Christians pick and choose when it comes to the Bible. The same Bible has been used throughout history to affirm both slavery and emancipation, sexism and equality, violence and nonviolence. The question, then, becomes what criteria should we use to pick and choose between various parts of scripture. This week’s Gospel lesson invites us to consider Jesus’ own way of reading scripture as a potential model for picking and choosing."

Carl goes on to suggest that if we are choosing anyway, why not choose love instead of hate, and talks about Jesus' emphasis. Read the entire post here.

third row

I often hear Christians use the phrase "love the sinner and hate the sin" when responding to the topic of homosexuality. Little do they know that this statement is hated by many gay and lesbian people.

"Love the sinner and hate the sin." We don't typically use this to refer to our friend, our grandma, our neighbour or the pastor at church. No, it's used to refer to someone whom we see as being different than us, someone who is a sinner unlike me and you who are good Christians. It labels people. It puts distance between us. It others them.

And despite the first half of the saying, the other person in the relationship rarely feels the love.

n.b. This phrase is not in the Bible. It "apparently comes from a letter that St. Augustine wrote to some contentious nuns. Augustine's phrase, "cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum," "with love of persons and hatred of sins," is used parenthetically, and does not even mention "sinners." (source)

[homeless for the holidays]

Carl Siciliano, Executive Director of New York's Ali Forney Center, writes:

Over the past few weeks I have been meeting with homeless LGBT youth. Each young person was, at the time I met with and photographed them, struggling to survive out on the streets as they waited for one of the few youth shelter beds in New York City to open up to them.

Read the rest of his account, along with the eleven photo+words vignettes that tell the stories of some of these youth who have been rejected by their families because of their sexuality and are now living on the streets of New York:
Homeless for the holidays: portraits of New York City's homeless lgbt youth

Their experiences are not unique to New York City. LGBT youth are mistreated and kicked out by their families regularly, including families who claim to be Christian and who devoutly attend church.

bully-free

heart exam

fred and his friends

Fred Phelps (not to be confused with Michael Fred Phelps the swimmer) is the pastor of Westboro Baptist Church, a small church comprised mostly of his family members. They are infamous for picketing at gay parades, funerals of gay people and soldiers, etc. Regrettably, they are the "face of Christianity" that some people see in the media -- full of hatred and bigotry and about the worst that a person can be. This Google images page will give you a visual idea of what they are all about (warning: disturbing images). Their main website is godhatesfags.com. They have been involved in this since the late '80s or so. They continue be active in picketing -- as recently as 2006, President Bush signed a Respect for America's Fallen Heros Act to stop them from picketing at military funerals.

You can also read about him on wikipedia. When I read the wikipedia article, I was quite surprised to read that Mr. Phelps is a lawyer who in his younger years was involved in fighting numerous civil rights cases on behalf of black clients. Kinda unexpected.

In any case, the cartoon takes him and his followers to the extreme. Content may be disturbing.

For the record, I have no idea as to whether Fred and his followers will make it to heaven or not. From an illustrative perspective, the angel is rather simplistic and I would in the long-run like to have a better "angel type" for my cartoons. Nonetheless, the idea is there.

[self-perceived goodness]

From Miroslav Volf's book Exclusion and Embrace:

In a profound reading of the Gospels in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Nietzsche underscored the connection between the self-perceived “goodness” of Jesus’ enemies and their pursuit of his death; crucifixion was a deed of “the good and just,” not of the wicked, as we might have thought. “The good and just” could not understand Jesus because their spirit was “imprisoned in their good conscience” and they crucified him because they construed as evil his rejection of their notions of good (Nietzsche 1969, 229: Westphal 1993, 262f.).

“The good and just,” insists Nietzsche, have to crucify the one who devises an alternative virtue because they already possess the knowledge of the good; they have to be hypocrites because, seeing themselves as good, they must impersonate the absence of evil. Like poisonous flies, “they sting” and they do so “in all innocence” (Nietzsche 1969, 204). Exclusion can be as much a sin of “a good conscience” as it is of “an evil heart.” And Nietzsche’s warning that “whatever harm the world-calumniators may do, the harm the good do is the most harmful harm” may not be entirely out of place (Nietzsche 1979, 100).

Volf, p. 61

n.b. calumniator means "someone who makes malicious or false statements or charges"

blond

Have you ever heard a blond joke which was about a blond guy? I haven't. Blond jokes -- even if the target is just referred to as "a blond", are always about women.

So along with the discrimination and prejudice which women generally face, a woman who is blond has an additional layer to tend with. This is sometimes referred to as intersectionality -- when more than one type of discrimination or prejudice impacts a person. Another example of this is the experience of black women who are discriminated against based on both gender and race.

transfur

[space for others]

From Miroslav Volf's book Exclusion and Embrace:

Chapter III develops the basic argument, best summarized in the Apostle Paul’s injunction to the Romans: “Welcome one another, therefore, just as Christ has welcomed you” (15:7). To describe the process of “welcoming,” I employ the metaphor of “embrace.” The metaphor seems well suited to bring together the three interrelated themes that are central to my proposal: (1) the mutuality of self-giving love in the Trinity (the doctrine of God), (2) the outstretched arms of Christ on the cross for the “godless” (the doctrine of Christ), (3) the open arms of the “father” receiving the “prodigal” (the doctrine of salvation)….

The most basic thought that it seeks to express is important: the will to give ourselves to others and ‘welcome’ them, to readjust our identities to make space for them, is prior to any judgment about others, except that of identifying them in their humanity. The will to embrace precedes any “truth” about others and any construction of their “justice.”

Volf, p. 28-29

abstinence

This cartoon reminds me of that famous line from Animal Farm: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Aside from issues of right and wrong, do we hear what we are saying? Do we understand why it is reasonable for such statements to be perceived as anti-gay?

to the margins

Who's on the throne of your life?

And who is on the throne of Jesus' life? Not the one who made himself nothing and came to serve us....

[quotes from volf]

I have been reading Miroslav Volf’s book Exclusion & Embrace over the past few months. It has made for fascinating and challenging reading which I am enjoying despite the tough slog it is to get through. While the subtitle of this blog relates to the title of his book, this blog is not about his book and there are significant differences between the two. For starters, Volf is much much smarter than I am. Secondly, his book is subtitled “A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation” and his personal experience that relates to this comes from the conflict between Serbs and Croatians. My blog, on the other hand, uses cartoons to explore issues of church, community, gender, poverty, sexuality and so on in the context of exclusion and embrace, rejection and acceptance.

One of the book’s endorsements, by Lewis Smedes, describes it well:

Exclusion and Embrace is a stunningly brilliant analysis of the toughest Christian challenge of our time: how to understand the persistent alienation of peoples in our world, alienation that is rooted in the strangeness of the other, in tribal memories of ancient wrongs, and the self-deceits of all – even the most victimized – groups in the conflict. It is a magnificent blend of insightful theology, historical vision, and human insights, one that is enriched by the author’s own multinational identity.

I will periodically be posting quotes from his book that seem to relate to the bigger issues involved here. They will be labeled “quotes from volf”.

If you are interested in reading the book yourself, here’s the reference:
Exclusion & Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation
Miroslav Volf (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996).

You might like to watch some videos of Volf sharing some of his thoughts. The Work of the People has seven videos. More can be found on YouTube.

See all posts with quotes from Volf.

reprobates

dictionary.reference.com defines the noun "reprobate" as:

1. a depraved, unprincipled, or wicked person: a drunken reprobate.
2. a person rejected by God and beyond hope of salvation.

Clearly not a nice word to use for referring to another person. While I can certainly see churchgoers expressing the attitude shown in this cartoon, I can't imagine Jesus using it. While initially it's easy to think he never called anyone names, he actually did:

There's the time when in answer to a question, he obliquely referred to a Canaanite woman as a dog (Matthew 15:21-28). And the times that he called the Pharisees names.

From what I recall, the Pharisees were the religious people of His day. What might Jesus be calling the religious people of today if he came down to earth?

about the labels (etc.)

This post exists to give clarity as to how this blog is using some of the categories (sometimes also called labels or tags), and the choice of related sites. It is a work in progress, and will continue to change over time.

About the categories

I am listing here only those categories on which I want to comment:

(s)

used as a suffix for labels which indicate a specific series on a given topic rather than just various cartoons which are about the same topic. For example, "not anti- (s)" is a series about "not being anti-gay."

church

for posts specifically about churches -- such as narrow gate, looking for jesus, etc but not the three-part-sermons (while their setting is a church, they are more about the ideas expressed by the pastor)

diversity

for posts which are about diversity in general, but not in the corporate sense (see next item)

diversity and inclusion

for posts which are about diversity and inclusion as used in corporate / organizational settings

grace

for posts which are specifically showing the experience of grace, the offering of grace, etc.

key

this identifies posts which to me hold key ideas and concepts. If you want the cream of the crop, start here.

labels

used when the issue is labelling someone, calling them names, etc.

language

used for posts which deal with "what words mean"

lookism

for exclusion, discrimination and prejudice based on physical attributes such as stature, hair colour, handedness, etc.

love the sinner... (s)

short for "love the sinner, hate the sin." The (s) indicates that this is a series of cartoons on this topic.

margins

for jesus going to the margins cartoon, and more...

my articles

this label is used for posts that are either (1) lengthier articles which I've written and posted up here or (2) posts which link to longer articles that I've written but which are elsewhere.

pastor stickman

this blog has various cartoons featuring pastors. In the early months of the blog, these were individual cartoons using the context of a pastor preaching to make a particular point. As of June 17, 2012, when pastor stickman inadvertantly outed himself, he has become a specific character and the cartoons relate to each other and build on each other. The "pastor stickman" label is only used for these newer ones.

rejection

used for 'lost gospels' and other cartoons that deal with overall rejection rather than rejection based on a specific other name-able matter

st. pea's

used for posts about st. pea's church. While not its real name, it is a real church in a real Canadian city

twist

used when a standard meaning or interpretation of a Bible verse or concept is twisted in some way -- for example, the narrow gate idea used to suggest leaving the church

welcome

for cartoons like "precious one" or 'church signs', which are explicitly about welcoming others

western jesus

this label is used for cartoons which show a Jesus who acts the way that contemporary North American Christians tend to. This idea and theme came out of reading Richard Beck's book unclean, taking some of the concepts from it and applying them to Jesus. In other words, if Jesus was the way we tend to be, how would he have acted in the situations he found himself in?

word art

used for images which are primarily words arranged in some artistic way

About the related sites

The list of related sites is carefully chosen to provide key resource websites on the kinds of topics covered on this blog. For the time being, my goal is to list a maximum of ten sites. Some of them may seem unrelated depending on what post you view on their site; for example, Experimental Theology covers a wide range of topics -- but I've included it as Richard Beck has frequently written on topics of great relevance to my site here.

bad roots

At an overt level, this cartoon simply takes the name "carrot top" and literalizes it, providing some comic relief while at the same time making the point that how we decide to make fun of people with one hair colour and not those with other hair colours is rather relative even if originally there was some source for the division.

The cartoon also provides me the opportunity to link to an excellent video about bullying. I like this video because words are secondary to the imagery and action, and even more because of the positive and unexpected way that one student responds to seeing the other student being bullied:



Aside from anti-bullying initiatives and policies, we as individuals can also make a difference for those who are bullied, mistreated, misrepresented, rejected, and so on. Am I willing to stand with those who are bullied, even if it means others look down on me? Even if others think I'm like them?

I'm reminded of how Jesus was referred to as "a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collector and sinners" (Matthew 11: 19). It seems these days, that we who claim to follow Jesus are rather reluctant to identify with those on the margins, and even more reluctant to be (perhaps mistakenly) identified as one of them. What's with that?

family friendly

Two things stand out for me about this cartoon. First, when the preacher says "God loves everyone!" and expands on it by saying "Gay, lesbian, bi, transgender" without including "straight", he is speaking from a place of privilege. Privilege here assumes that "of course God loves heterosexuals; what is not clear is whether or not God loves those who are non-heterosexual." Inherent in this type of privilege is the assumption that the privileged majority is included, is right, is best, and so on, and usually those who are part of it never question or even think about such things.

Secondly, are gay and lesbian and bisexual and transgender people not from families? Do they not have families? And are there not families in the church who have gay sons and lesbian sisters and bisexual cousins and transgender partners? So the not-yet-spoken implication by the pastor that "because this is a family-friendly church we can't have LGBT people running around", is actually counter-family, or family-unfriendly.

If Jesus had been as picky as we often are about whom we associate with, he would have avoided the lepers, the woman at the well, the woman caught in adultery, the woman who had been bleeding for years and years, the beggars on the street, the man who was demon-possessed, Zaccheus and other tax collectors, prostitutes, and general sinners of all sorts. He would have spent his time with nice religious people, reading the Torah, and looking good. And with all of that he wouldn't be Jesus anymore ... he'd be a Christian*.

* north american variety. And yes, I realize this is a grand generalization which is not fair to the many north america-based followers of Jesus who do get it. However, this is what the majority of non-Christians perceive when they think of Christians.

litmus test

*In case the letters are too small, "ssb" is short for same-sex blessings.

The sermon this past Sunday was on the passage in Matthew 25 regarding the sheep and the goats, and the pastor brought out some interesting points. One was that in the Middle East, there are many varieties of sheep and goats, and that you cannot tell them apart except by their tails! So it seems my two pictures in the cartoon represent western understandings of sheep and goats.

In any case, this cartoon was inspired by the comment made at times that same-sex blessings will be the litmus test as to whether a mainline denomination is faithful to orthodox Biblical views. Really? That's the litmus test?

What about seeing how well they actually do what Jesus says and does? Wouldn't that be a better test of whether "followers of Jesus" are really following Him?

precious one

"They said you wouldn't let me in...."

Wow. Who are we to decide whether someone else gets into heaven or not? And then to have the audacity to tell other people that they won't get in! And it tends to be communicated in formats like "You are going to hell" or "Homosexuals will burn in hell."

I believe in grace. And I believe that somehow or other, millions and billions who were excluded here on earth will be welcomed into heaven, whether or not they heard about Jesus down here, whether they lived a good life or a bad life or the average life with small moments of brilliance and small moments of depravity that many of us live. I don't know how God will do it, but He can. I'm not saying there's no hell, nor am I saying that no one will end up in hell. I don't know about that. But if millions and billions are going to end up in hell, then that's not the God I want to be following. There we have it – my cards are on the table.

I believe in a big God with arms wide open. If I as an earthly father love my children no matter what, surely my heavenly Father loves us far more no matter what. Does that mean what we do here doesn't matter? Of course not. It matters immensely because what we do down here can help make the world a better place for everyone or a worse place for everyone.

I'd love to hear what your thoughts are on this....

---

David Hayward at the Naked Pastor has an interesting cartoon and commentary on this as well: which word doesn't belong?

Interested in reading more about the question of heaven and hell? Check out Rob Bell's new book Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived.Video: Introduction to Love Wins

lost gospels

Is the church a place for sinners? What about Jesus' words in Mark where he says, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” And in Luke 19:10 it says, “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

Are some sinners 'too bad' to be part of your church? Or perhaps it's that their sins are unacceptable to the majority? Who decides this?
How does the tone of the question of 'where is your husband?' contrast with a similar question that Jesus asked the woman at the well (John 4:1-26)?

By 'your kind', the church people are obviously not meaning 'humanoid'. So what do they mean by 'your kind?' How does it make it easier for them to reject the person if they think of zem as "your kind?"

What kinds of people are welcome at your church? What kinds of people are ignored, shunned or rejected?

How does the instruction to 'get a suit' reflect a desire to have everyone look good on the outside, to conform to the status quo?

frankly

Another cartoon in the "we're not anti-gay" series. Did you know that sitting on the fence can have adverse effects on key parts of the body?

church signs

This cartoon was inspired by conversations about the idea of "welcoming but not affirming". Typically, such signs are not on the front lawn but are only discovered after you attend a church. In the case of "Live and love without labels," this is the reality of Highlands Church in Denver.

How do you understand the action of welcoming someone? How is it the same or different from affirming them?

Whom did Jesus welcome, and how did he welcome? If you attend or are involved in a church, whom do they welcome?

men's daily prayers

This one was inspired by reading about the prayer that Jewish men actually prayed for years (and some might still pray?), and then taking it from there. Of course, some of the things the man on the left is praying could readily be the view of the man on the right as well -- we are just not as open about it as they were in Old Testament times.

Are we making progress?

[from labels to liberty]

My friend Jamie Arpin-Ricci, "an urban missionary, pastor, church planter and writer living in Winnipeg’s inner city West End neighbourhood", wrote an excellent post on from labels to liberty, addressing first the importance of seeing people primarily as people rather than based on labels, then giving a specific example in the context of mental illness and the church, and closing with the importance of truth-speaking. I recommend the article highly – Jamie is articulate and speaks from his experience within his community.

He has also just released a book called The Cost of Community: Jesus, St. Francis and Life in the Kingdom (click to find out more about this book, including "a look inside").

anybody

What we are known for?

Are we primarily known for being against things, whether the older version of "Christians don't drink, smoke or dance" or the newer versions of "anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, anti-anti-bullying campaigns, etc."?

Or are we primarily known for those things which are good, such as the fruits of the spirit, helping the oppressed and marginalized, being respectful of those with different views and lives, being people of integrity? Does what we do and how we live help people move toward God, or does it push them away from Him?  Does the goodness of God ooze out of us, or is there so much antagonism, fear, and contempt of others that very little of Jesus shines through?

soup

Some people ask "what would Jesus do?" This pastor, from his literal perspective, asks "what wouldn't Jesus do?"

I know, I know — it's a silly cartoon. But some days are like that, and some people, unfortunately, are like this, and miss the reality of having the heart of Jesus with one another.

last supper

In this somewhat ludicrous cartoon, the idea in my head was predominantly the idea of timing, and in this case, perhaps especially bad timing and a lack of reading one's setting. But of course there are other things involved here as well, including:

Can a disciple of Jesus be gay? (my answer to this question is yes of course -- there are many Christ-followers who are outside of the heterosexual mainstream).

Is it necessary to come out to Jesus? Doesn't he already know?

I'm sure some of you will have other thoughts or questions after seeing this cartoon, and invite you to share them via the comments. This is, incidently, the cartoon where in the initial drafts, the disciples looked like they were from the movie Planet of the Apes.

pew warmers

What does it mean to "not be anti-gay?" Is this similar to "not being anti-black" or "not being anti-men"?

Or perhaps, using the standard rule that two negatives cancel each other out, does being "not anti-gay" equal being gay? Or if two negatives equal a positive, would being "not anti-gay" equal being pro-gay?

At a broader level, do you feel welcome to sit in the pews of your church (or a church)? Are you looking to do more than just sit in the pew?

This cartoon was inspired by events in the summer of 2011 when, in response to online protests, Howard Schulz, the CEO and Chairman of Starbucks, pulled out of speaking at a large event sponsored by a large church. The pastor responded very graciously toward Howard, encouraging people to buy his book, get coffee there, and so on. However, some of what he said in response to the accusations made by the protesters was interesting in terms of language. For more on this, see the post anti-gay on redletterchristians.org.

lost sheep

This cartoon puts a twist to the familiar parable of the lost sheep, found in the Gospels of Matthew 18 and Luke 15.

Here, the sheep is leaving the ninety-nine other sheep to go look for Jesus, who apparently (from all appearances) has left the building.

Have you ever felt like this, or done this? Perhaps some friends or family members have expressed such sentiments....

Why is this happening? Where did we as a church go astray, that some need to leave to go look for Jesus elsewhere?

boycott



Conservative religious people like boycotting, especially in the U.S. I remember how in the 1980's they were boycotting Proctor and Gamble products. Why, you ask? Because the original logo for P&G looked Satanic to them. Turns out that the 13 stars are not about Satan but are for the original 13 American states, and that the face is "the man in the moon." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procter_%26_Gamble (logo controversy section) for the whole story if you are interested.

In more recent years, the religious right have boycotted various products and companies, including Disney because Disney was having some special days for gay and lesbian people. This cartoon was inspired by such things.

the narrow gate

Who's in and who's out? What overt or subtle signs are there indicating who is welcome?

When is it better to leave? Necessary to leave?

The narrow gate that leads to life is not always what people expect it to be.....

messed up

At least several ironies here, from thinking that he has it all together to the ludicrous idea that a person had the power to determine who can enter the kingdom of heaven and in what order. Of course, that's a game that's often played, with unfortunate consequences as people are judged and subsequently leave never to return (or never enter a church to begin with).

Who decides who gets into heaven? Has someone decided that you or someone you love won't be allowed in? Or shouldn't be allowed in?

no transfats

This is the first cartoon which I drew in conjunction with thinking about the range of topics which you will see this blog covering. It takes a symbol which we find on many food products and gives it a little twist by applying it to a church.

How does the sign's message interact with the message of the official 'all welcome' sign?

How might the person approaching the church be feeling about it? How might ze feel when considering the sign and the person in the doorway?

Are all really welcome here? How about at your church, in your workplace, in your home?

welcome

Welcome to with arms wide open: an exploration of exclusion and embrace.

This blog is about moving away from the stance of exclusion and rejection of others which is found in so many people who call themselves Christians, and moving to embrace other people no matter what. Just like Jesus. He continually moved toward those at the margins of life. He ate with tax collectors and sinners, he touched lepers, he interacted with outcasts. His arms were wide open to those around him, loving them, accepting them where they are at, and inviting them to take part in the kingdom.

My vision is that followers of Jesus would be known for being for those who are oppressed and  marginalized, and that those who are marginalized, oppressed, poor, outcast could walk into any church and be welcomed wholeheartedly and without hesitation.

My goal with this blog is to provoke thinking about our attitudes and actions, in a way that results in us being more like Jesus in our interactions with one another, and specifically with people who are marginalized. This blog falls into the general category of "social commentary" (definition) and as such uses a variety of techniques including hyperbole, tongue-in-cheek, sarcasm, inversion and quotes from others in supplementing the actual cartoons. Of course, once in a while you might just find some silliness without a deeper meaning.

I'm not an artist. I'm just a guy who draws in order to communicate ideas, which is why many of these cartoons have stick or circle-head people. Some cartoons have more detailed people which look okay after several drafts (for example, in the early version of one cartoon, Jesus' disciples looked like they were from the Planet of the Apes). While I used to post 6-10 posts per month, you can now expect one to four posts per month. Generally, posts with [square brackets] around the title indicate that they are about third-party material (quotes from others, book mentions, etc) and posts without square brackets indicate that they contain material by me -- usually cartoons and commentary or a lengthier article but sometimes other content like horrid false apology poems.

Though I like thinking about things and my mind keeps generating new ideas for cartoons, I'm not a philosopher either. I'm hoping that the comments and discussion which you contribute will help all of us learn how to live together as the one body of Christ.

Inviting you to journey with me,


rob goetze
amateur lover. aspiring stigmatoclast. fledgling advocateur.


p.s. Despite having a similar title, this blog is not about Miroslav Volf's amazing book Exclusion and Embrace, though I have been reading it and quote from it on occasion. I would have liked to have some variation of "with arms wide open" in the web address, but they were all taken. "Exclusion and embrace" struck a chord and was available for use.

p.p.s. Lately I have not been drawing that many cartoons, as I have been involved in other matters including writing longer papers. However, the older posts often have cartoons.

Last edited December 17, 2018