(Notice I took the vs. out of the title - it seemed too competitive!)
An escapist view of the gospel – one that centres on salvation as the assurance of eternal life away from the hardships of this life – characterizes the Evangelical church here in Burkina. Kingdom theology, on the other hand, holds that with the coming of Jesus (The Christmas event), the Kingdom has already penetrated the earth. We live in a Kingdom that is already present but not yet fully realised; in a creation that is already being transformed, even though this is at times imperceptible.
In a context where most people are poor with little practical hope of improving conditions, the escapist view is certainly attractive. Who would want to hang around where there is suffering and hunger? Won’t it be glorious to be whisked away to heaven when we die or when Christ returns? It reminds me of old gospel music. One famous group sang the song, “Don’t it make you wanna go home…anxiously awaiting, anticipating, prayin’ that it won’t be long.” Another popular one is, “I’ve got a mansion just over the hilltop.” Such songs almost seem to insinuate that if I could die instantly, I’d be better off. It’s not that this is untrue – who can fathom what eternal life will be like? But it is incomplete.
As disciples of Christ for whom Jesus’ life is normative, we believe we have a duty to reveal how the Kingdom of God has already penetrated the Earth. When John the Baptist sends his disciples to Jesus asking if he is indeed the Messiah, the one who would save the world, Jesus says nothing about whisking people away. Instead, he responds, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them.” These are characteristics of the Kingdom. The Kingdom’s values could be better understood through the Beatitudes in Matthew 5. Again, the limits of this article do not allow more depth here – Jesus does elsewhere talk about preparing places (in heaven?) for the disciples. “In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?” John 14:2
So it seems yet again (and maybe this conclusion holds for most of these articles) that an equilibrium must be found between these two perspectives. Is it insensitive for Mennonite Mission workers in the Burkina church context to focus on Kingdom issues – working for justice, healing, against poverty; trying to bring a whole or more complete gospel to a people (at least in the Christian community) who would just as soon focus on one day escaping the broken systems of government and society? It seems an odd question for those of us from a Western Anabaptist perspective. Often we phrase the question in the opposite way: Isn’t it insensitive to evangelize in a setting where people are firstly hungry or hurting? Is it not better to meet those basic needs and reveal God’s will (or Kingdom/Shalom project) for the healing of Creation?
This latter approach will be a long, difficult process in Burkina Faso. The “escapist view” gives much faster results and is something that the very spiritual-minded Burkinabé can understand. For a more wholesome Kingdom theology to take root here, it will be necessary for Mennonites/Anabaptists to work with, better understand, and not be so critical of this “escapist perspective”.
Am I way off here? I’d like to know. Please respond.
By the way, two authors I really appreciate who talk the "Kingdom talk" are Walter Wink and Lee Camp. Check them out.
2 comments:
Hi Jeff: Thanks so much for these though provoking posts. I have been and continue to be intrigued with the variety of theological understandings in our world. In Sept., I will lead a retreat for MC Canada staff on the topic of Branding Faith. Your posts are adding to my reflection as I prepare. I've only been to Africa once, and for only 3 weeks at that - but in my work of the last 9 years I have been following the variety of Christian understandings and expressions in Africa with much interest. As you know, the emphasis on evil spirits among Mennonites in NA is at a completely different place than it is in Burkina. In Canada, the unchurched population also has a lot of criticism of denominationalism - as I once did - but I have come to understand that this has tremendous potential to make the Body richer (a parallel to Fruits of the Spirit comes to mind). It also has the potential to tear people and communities apart when all Christians are perceived through the lense of the unusual or un-Christian like behaviour of other groups.
We live in a world of both/and, not yet but already here. It's a challenging yet wonderful dichotomy. Previous responses - rightly, I believe - point out the influence of culture on the life of a faith community.
Denominationalism often threatens to confuse that even further: there is ethnic culture, family culture, denominational culture, congregational culture - and then add to that a layer of values and ethos that comes from a variety of levels: Bible, pastor, peers, mentors, etc. I'm learning that one needs to approach faith in North America with an incredible sense of sophistication for the nuance. I think we bring that with as - as normative and as white NAmericans - when we minister in other countries. The trouble is, we may not realize the depth of our nuanced (even trivialized?) understanding because it has become normative for us in a society where most middle class Christians don't need to think so hard about finding shelter, food, transportation, etc. Our lifestyle has evolved to a point where we have had the luxury of time and resources to think deeply about about 'esoterica' when is comes to our faith lives. So we bring our nuances and our values and our ethos to another culture and work and hope and pray for radical change - when really it is about baby steps.
Keep up the great posts, Jeff. For every response, there are probably dozens who have also read them...
An emailed comment from someone who gave me permission to post here:
I can really appreciate the struggle you are involved in. Responding by email is so inadequate and cumbersome. The struggle you are dealing with in Burkina is one that I deal with to some extent even in my own family. For instance, I have one set of children who have distanced themselves from the church because they are so disillusioned with the "vengeful God" that that they perceive in the Christian church. They would however resonate well with the concept of all of life as being sacred. Up to a point I too believe that it is because God has called it into existance. However, I think the gospel is so much bigger than that. It seem to me that in the church we often make the mistake of seeing issues as "either , or" instead of "both, and" . For instance, if I see Christ's death as being strictly as a sacrificial atonement, then I miss out on the enormous ourpouring of love that it really was. I used to wonder, why, if God and Jesus are "One", why did God demand that Jesus had to die. What was missing for me was the fact that this message
came to a people and a cullture in a time when virtually all the cultures had a view of a "wrath filled, vengeful, God." Now, I see it, not so much as God requiring that appeasement as that God's love is so boundless and amazing that He (She?.....Another example of "Both, And" ) would extend that love to the utmost evil that humankind can do and still say, "I love you, I forgive you."
I suppose, with regards to the Pie in the Sky view versus, justice, peace and discipleship, I again think in terms of "Both, And". This heavenly hope is a present reality, not just a future hope. As such, it needs to permeate all of my life and relationships. Does this make anyh sense, or am I only spinnning my wheels? Hilda
Post a Comment