[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.