Jesus Politics: Why Christians Should Not Vote At All

*The following post is part of the synchroblog hosted by The American Jesus. And while you are at, go ahead and check out Keegan's post at Paper Crane Library.*

During my research for my Master's thesis on an ethic of nonviolence in and for the Wesleyan tradition, I was introduced to Christian anarchism. My curiosity about this topic stemmed from reading Stanley Hauerwas's book War and the American Difference: Theological Reflections on Violence and National Identity. Hauerwas exposes contemporary American patriotism as a form of religion with its own set of beliefs and idols of worship that has been perpetuated on the basis of owing our allegiance and gratitude to those who have made sacrifices in previous American wars. Consequentially, future wars are deemed necessary to justify previous wars, and we are now in a seemingly never-ending cycle of state sanctioned violence.

Hauerwas does not explicitly espouse anarchism as the better alternative, but his book explains how contemporary American patriotism has captured the allegiance of its citizens, including those who willingly describe themselves as Christians. A narrative has been espoused by many influential American Christians that conflates patriotism with faithful Christian living, and the questioning of the validity of the "Christian" nature of patriotism is an act of heresy. It is in response to the dichotomy between Jesus's model of living and American patriotism that has drawn me towards Christian anarchism that is equipped Hauerwas's suggestion that the Church is called to act as an alternative political reality to that of the United States.

I believe Hauerwas has correctly identified a major issue in regards to patriotic Christianity, and he has provided a compelling alternative to American politics. In the United States allegiance is placed on "American traditional values" and the leaders who remain faithful to them, but not solely on God. The counter-argument is that God places these leaders in power, which results in God's will being fulfilled through the American government, but this argument fails to acknowledge the focus on self-serving policies that guide the presidential debates. Listening to the presidential debates reveals that the major issues are focused on the wealth, health, and prosperity of the United States. In contrast to the inward focused dialogue of the presidential debates, the will of God is focused on humanity becoming a source of service and redemption of all: including those beyond the US border. 

Anarcho-pacifist/Christian anarchist flag

But neither of the two main political parties that plague our media outlets are concerned with universal well-being. They are both in service of the self-serving desires of the citizens of the United States. And even worse, most of the political discourse in the United States buys in to the myth of our "democracy," but our vote is only important if it is cast for a republican or a democratic candidate. There are third party candidates that stretches the political imagination of what is possible, but they are silenced by the lack of attention from mainstream media, and support of these other parties are considered a wasted vote, which would have been better used in support of the lesser of two evils. The fact alone that we are limited to choosing the lesser of two evils is a sign that moral integrity is not a driving force of politics, and I refuse to submit to and perpetuate this broken system. Perhaps, I would be more inclined to vote if other parties were taken seriously, but as it stands the "choice" remains limited and the two leading parties contradict the servant leadership of Jesus Christ. You can either vote for a republican that wishes to increase a military budget, or you can vote for the democrat that permits the secret murders of people in other countries via drone attacks. 

Even the discussion of participation in elections as a political act stands outside of what it means to be a Christian anarchist. A Christian anarchist is not passive (much like a Christian pacifist is not passive either), but is pro-active. Christian anarchy is not withdrawal from political discourse and activity, but rather the Christian anarchist's political activity occurs outside of the realm of the American political system. The guiding principle for Christian anarchists is allegiance to God, and this allegiance alone requires faithful followers to bring healing and redemption to the consequences of laws and policies that shun the poor and needy. As a Christian being political requires hands on engagement with the community around them; to assist in those places where there is life happening, and to try and bring healing to those places where there is pain and suffering. The claim that voting is your highest civic duty contradicts the good news of the Gospel, because it leads us to believe that we have done all that we can to improve our political conditions merely by voting. Instead of actually embodying the redemption of God modeled by Jesus, a vote just means that we expect politicians to take care of it for us and we can go on living our lives without hands on community improvement. Political action can come in the form of protests, feeding the hungry, clothing the poor, or simply befriending that lonely neighbor. Whether you vote or not, just remember that the Gospel is political, but only when Christ's disciples manifest the good news of redemption in their lives.

Eucharist

I'm grateful that I am able to worship with a Church community that serves the Eucharist as a weekly part of the service. Especially since it is a Nazarene church and this practice is not very common in other Nazarene churches that I have visited or been a part of throughout my life. I'm also grateful that the Eucharist isn't offered in a prepackaged, neat, and clean form. Instead of receiving a tiny circle of a bread-like substance that represents Christ's crucified body accompanied by a small shot of grape juice that represents Christ's blood, each person approaches the plate and breaks off a piece of the bread, which is followed by the bread being dunked into the cup of grape juice (since the Nazarene manual forbids alcohol).

I don't believe there is a right or wrong way to serve communion, but I do believe the method chosen offers different experiences of our participation in Christ's crucifixion that is remembered in the Eucharist. I prefer to grab a larger piece of Christ's body, because the extended period of time need for chewing requires more time that allows longer reflection on what it means for Christ to have undergone sin's manifestation in our selfish, violent behaviors and tendencies. But before I partake of the body, it is dunked into Christ's blood, which I soak so that it drips onto my hand that I place under the bread as I bring it back towards me. Feeling the grape juice drip onto my hands is a strong reminder that my hands are stained with the blood of Christ whenever I cause or neglect to remedy the pain and suffering of others.

The tangible, participatory nature of the Eucharist is important for me, because it constantly reminds me of Christ's willingness to undergo the suffering of our world. And as a Christian called to strive towards holiness, I can always use more reminders. At the last supper, Jesus served the broken bread and the wine to his disciples as a reminder of the cost of obedience to God - a high cost because that obedience confronts the selfish nature of a world under sin's mastery, which might result in death like it dead for Jesus. By continuing the purpose Jesus set forth at the last supper, the consistent partaking of the Eucharist does not become rote. It is simultaneously encouraging and challenging, because it is difficult to live lovingly and gracefully with the awareness of heartache in our world, but I am also encouraged that a life of love is necessary and possible, and we are not forced to do it alone. With the knowledge of Christ's resurrection, I'm assured that God is capable of and is redeeming the world, through the obedience of God's followers, from the tragedies of sin. I will continue to partake in the Eucharist as a reminder that my hands are capable of spilling Christ's blood, and strive to make sure that they don't. And for that constant reminder, I'm truly grateful for the Eucharist and the ability to be a part of a church community that recognizes its value.

If There Is No Heaven...

Comic found at Toothpaste for Dinner

During my undergraduate studies I took an upper division bible class in which the professor asked us, "If somehow you could be absolutely certain that there is no heaven, would you still be a Christian?" For some people a question like this might be shocking or offensive, but his point was profound and still sticks with me today. If the sole reason why many people are Christians is to gain access into heaven when we die, then I believe we have greatly missed a significant aspect of the biblical faiths.

I will make you into a great nation,

    and I will bless you;

I will make your name great,

    and you will be a blessing.

I will bless those who bless you,

    and whoever curses you I will curse;

and all peoples on earth

    will be blessed through you. 

Gen 12:2, NIV

Beginning with God's calling out of Israel to be a holy people set apart from the world, we see that there is a significant duty for God's people. In God's promise to Israel, blessings are bestowed unto the world through Israel's faithfulness - "and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you." God set the Israelites apart from the rest of the world to become a people dedicated to sharing God's love and grace to those who do not recognize it or refuse to accept it. Failure to recognize, accept, or live a life that reflects God's love allows sin to control us, and we selfishly continue to cause pain and suffering for ourselves and others. Sin is our self-love that results in the neglect of others. When people suffer we tend to place the blame not on ourselves, but on those who are suffering. Sin causes us to speak great untruths in order to release our guilt. The person living on the street is there because of an addiction or poor choices. We should not feel bad when we ignore their request for help. The woman who was raped was asking for it by being less cautious and by wearing skimpy clothes. The person threatening to jump off the bridge on to the freeway is just a nuisance causing traffic blocks and needs to be either shot down or pushed off and scraped off the road so the rush hour traffic can get home. Who cares about the emotional or psychological distress they need help with? The terrorists just hate Americans. It has nothing to do with the fact that many are deprived of basic needs such as food and shelter. The way to take care of the threat is to fight back with violent, lethal power, which is "easier" than concerning ourselves with the economic disparities throughout the world that we benefit from.

It is this kind of sinful thinking that makes the world, God's beautiful creation, a difficult place to live in and to worship God for the mighty works God has accomplished. It is in response to the suffering and sorrow of the world and the selfish "solutions" offered that I can say that I would still be a Christian if somehow I was able to know with one hundred percent certainty that heaven does not exist. As a Christian grafted into the calling of Israel to be a people set apart, I want to set myself apart from the sinful way of thinking about the world's suffering. I am committed to the calling of the people of God to be reflections of God's image - the image of love and grace. The fulfillment of that commitment is through selfless love and service, which is often very difficult (but that is why we need the support found in a Church body), and not by believing the correct doctrine and doing our best to convince other people to adopt our beliefs. I now leave the question to you, because your response might differ from mine: "If somehow you could be absolutely certain that there is no heaven, would you still be a Christian?"

As always, I welcome and love to hear responses in the comments.

Ambassadors to the Earthly Kingdom

I have been wanting to do a post that introduces my views on the state (and the US in particular since that is the context through which I understand the term "state"), but I came across this sermon from Bruxy Cavey that explains an Anabaptist perspective on the relationship between the Church and state, which closely matches my thoughts in a manner more concise than I would have been if I typed it out. I strongly suggest setting aside the time to view the two parts that run a total of about fourteen minutes long.

Bruxy confirmed the following points for me:

• The Church is easily wrapped up in and distracted by the attempts to make the state act more Christian, instead of helping the Church act more Christian. 
• The way of Jesus is not giving up on society, but bringing change in a different way - serving from the bottom up.
• I am a Christian before and long after I am an American.
• To be a pacifist does not mean "to be passive." Pacifist means "to be working for peace."
• There is one Christian nation, the people of God, and it is a transnational nation.

And these are the points that I was either amazed at and wondering "Why didn't I think of that?", still working through and/or currently being challenged by:

• The intentional mockery and irony in the actions of Jesus's crucifiers actually reveal the truth of God's kingdom (e.g. the crown of thorns indicates suffering to which the kingdom of God does not run away from, but actually reveals the truth that God enters into our suffering).
• As citizens of the kingdom of God that are foreigners in the earthly kingdoms, our roles are to be ambassadors of the heavenly kingdom to the earthly kingdoms.

Part one:
   
Part two:
 

I have a limited knowledge of the Anabaptist tradition, but I am extremely interested in learning more. If you have any comments, other resources, or suggestions about Anabaptists, pacifism, the separation of the Church and state, or other related topics I would love to hear them in the comments.

Torture and Eucharist

During the defense of my Master's thesis, my committee asked some questions about how the topic of my thesis might look in practice. I was so worried about my content and the way I presented my research that I was not expecting a question like that, but I am grateful that it came up. The official title for my thesis is An Ethic of Nonviolence In and For the Wesleyan Tradition. In a nutshell, I approached this topic because it seems clear to me that John Wesley's doctrine of sanctification and its foundation in the restoration of  the image of God in the believer must inherently encourage Christians to eschew violence as a practice of the perfect love of God and neighbor, yet I am unaware of any Wesleyan denomination that explicitly includes peacemaking as a necessary part of Christian discipleship. And this disconnect between Wesley's focus on the perfect love of God and neighbor and the official stance of Wesleyan denominations regarding war and violence makes the question of how my thesis can be put into practice crucial for further theological reflection and Christian practice.

I mention this because it was the preface of me deciding to read William Cavanaugh's book Torture and Eucharist: Theology, Politics, and the Body of Christ. While in the midst of writing my thesis, I had a discussion with a friend who was, as a fellow pacifist Wesleyan, interested in my topic and what could be done as a Church body to be peacemakers in North Park and its surrounding communities of San Diego in which we live and worship. He had a wonderful idea of partaking in the Eucharist at sites where violence has been committed. A part of this sacrament would also include a dropping of a piece of the bread and a spilling of the wine (or grape juice) on the ground to visibly and publicly acknowledge that Christ's body is broken and his blood is shed in the bodies of the victims of violence. I was grateful for this discussion, because it provided me with a way to begin to understand how to make the body of Christ as well as sin's violent, damaging reality visible, and I was able to explain this idea as one possible way of living out an ethic of nonviolence to my thesis committee. The defense continued with me and my committee attempting to discuss other ways that the Church can participate in the divine plan of redemption through peacemaking practices, but the idea of the Eucharist is one of the clearest practice of the Church that can help Christians orient their lives toward being peacemakers since it symbolizes Jesus's violent death on the cross. My thesis defense went well, and the discussion was extremely fruitful. One of my committee members suggested that I read Torture and Eucharist, because I had not read it before and it would be beneficial for further theological reflection on Christian nonviolence.

The premise of this book is that the Chilean Catholic church was unable to immediately respond to the violent, secret torturing of Chileans during the regime of General Pinochet (1915-2006) that began after a coup on September 11, 1973, because the church in Chile held to an ecclesiology, based on the writings of
French Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain (1882-1973), that was unprepared to respond to Pinochet's actions. Maritain's philosophy led the church officials in Chile to believe that it had authority over the souls of Chileans, but the bodies were the possession of the state. Therefore, it was difficult for the church authorities to confront Pinochet regimes despite the numerous accusations brought to their attention. The Pinochet regime kidnapped its prisoners secretly, and the government authorities continued to deny their imprisonment. They simply responded with the suggestion that the missing people had probably ran away. The secrecy and the methods of torture effectively individualized each victim so that, if they survived, they felt no connection to other people or other victims, thus eliminating any possibility of expressing and revealing the activities of Pinochet's military dictatorship.

Among the reasons for the church's lack of initial response to the disappearance and torture of Chilean citizens was the protection the church possessed as a result of an agreement made long before Pinochet's usurpation of power. The church's programs and authority over the spiritual matters of Chileans were guaranteed to be untouched by any Chilean government, which was a compromise made so that the church would not attempt to reinstate a new Christendom. This lack of authority over the bodies and actions of Chileans, however, made the church feel powerless against Pinochet's secret, violent activities. Ultimately, the church begins to experience tension between the requests for help from the poor and the abused victims of Pinochet's regime and the church's understanding of the its role in the lives of the Chileans. The church set up means for the poor to receive assistance, and legal assistance to those searching for their missing family members, and the church was able to withstand any attempts at being shut down by placing a church official at the head of these programs and appealing to the immunity the church has against government interference.

The church began to be a source of solidarity for the victims of torture and poverty by connecting them to the body of Christ. Protestors were willing to face abuse and punishment, thereby making the violence of the disappeared visible and making their martyrdom a reality. The reality of the Church as the body of Christ connected the victims to Christ's suffering on the cross. When one member of the body of Christ suffers, the entire body of Christ suffers. Christ's death on the cross is experienced in the agony of the tortured and the hungry, and all Christians are united to this suffering through our participation in the Eucharist. The Eucharist, properly understood as the participation in the suffering of Christ and others, requires Christians to relieve the suffering of others, and to never be the cause of that suffering.

Having read this book I better understand why the sacraments, the Eucharist n particular, are important. They are the common thread that connects the body of Christ with other members, but that is only the surface. In that connection of Christians to other Christians, and to Christ himself, partakers of the Eucharist are called to witness against all of sin's manifestation (like violence and destruction) by accepting and proclaiming an alternative way of understanding the world - a way that always seeks redemption. The Eucharist makes our membership in the body of Christ a reality. By partaking of the body and the blood we commit ourselves to the kingdom of God above all other things. The temptations and desires of this world make this commitment a challenge, but we are united together in one body, which helps us through our burdens and challenges. And thankfully we receive help from God with Christ as the head of that body.

And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross (Col 1:18-20).

Serving a Single Master

 (Thanks to Paper Crane Library for bringing the following article from Forbes to my attention.)

Forbes has created a list of the best and worst Master's degrees for jobs. Surprisingly, the MA in Religion and the MDiv was not included in the worst list (they probably earned an honorable mention that just wasn't mentioned). Yet, I could not ignore the list, because the second best Master's degree for future jobs is Computer Science. When I began my undergraduate studies I had declared myself as a Computer Science major because I knew that it would be a financially beneficial field, but after a semester of computer programming and calculus I could not stand the thought of a life devoted to computer science. I always knew that computer science is not limited to my worst enemy - programming - but if that task is the foundation of various computer science careers I decided that it would be foolish for me to continue computer science since I was headed for a life of jobs I would not enjoy regardless of potential wealth. I respect those who have chosen and enjoy a path in computer science, but it was not the path for me. It was during that time that I began to realize that my studies should be based on the enjoyment I will receive from advancing in whatever field  I chose.

At the beginning of my sophomore year I chose Philosophy and Theology for a few reasons, but, admittedly, among the reasons for my switch to this major the most compelling was the small number of units required for that particular major. Still, I had other reasons for switching to Philosophy and Theology. I was also fascinated by the historical contexts of the biblical books, the variations in type of literature that make up the whole of scripture, the length of time between the writing of the earliest books and the latest books and what that means for the biblical narrative, the historical development of doctrine, and the variances between the various expressions of the Christian faith were just a few of the ideas that would begin to grab my attention and fuel my desire to learn more about philosophy, biblical studies, and theology. The joy I continue to receive from my academic studies is priceless. The Forbes article explains that the criteria for the list admits that the jobs on the worst side of the list can be pleasurable to people, but the author's intent is to warn readers about the low availability of jobs, the medium pay, and the potential struggle for advancement opportunities in these fields. Ultimately, the worst and best list is based upon financial gain, which is assumed to be the way to achieve happiness. Coming from a family that often faces financial struggles, I see how poverty can lead to depression when basic needs are barely being met. But I have avoided seeing career success and big paychecks as the way to avoid that depression. I began with a redefinition of needs and happiness. The former cannot be defined as the accumulation of objects, which means that financial wealth does not fulfill the latter.

Personification of Mammon found on Wikipedia.

Happiness must come from joy found in meaningful, healthy activities that comprise our daily lives. In one particular essay,  The Minimalists offer a wonderful exposition on how genuine happiness is best found in free activities. Their entire collection of essays are helpful for taking my focus away from materialistic desires. Their essays are not theological, but it does express a truth found throughout all of scripture that continuously reminds us of how the things of this world (money, power, possessions, etc.) distract us from finding ways to express God's radical, unconditional love. Therefore, I am troubled (but not alarmed) that the list of best and worst career pursuits is based on financial criteria. I do understand the author's warning that it is not wise to pursue an education that you will not be able to pay for, but to categorize academic pursuits as "worst" and "best" based upon potential income still express an outlook on money in terms of terrible definitions of happiness and need. I am content and completely happy without a six figure income. I am especially encouraged by Jesus's declaration that you cannot serve two masters, God and Mammon (or money) (Matt. 6:24), and I will continue to recognize that happiness comes from serving others as an expression of God's love for all of creation. I love pursuing theological studies, and I hope theology will merely serve as a step of toward making my daily life a reflection of the kingdom of God. As Wesley often proclaimed, happiness is found in service of God's love. In his sermon "The Circumcision of the Heart" he says,

Very excellent things are spoken of love; it is the essence, the spirit, the life of all virtue. It is not only the first and great command, but it is all the commandments in one. "Whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are amiable," or honorable; "if there be any virtue, if there be any praise," they are all comprised in this one word, -- love. In this is perfection, and glory, and happiness. [cf. Phil 4:8]

Perhaps I am young and my financial burdens are currently light, which allows me to be happy and content right now, but I hope and pray that my life will always be defined by serving God without the burdensome distraction of fulfilling my most basic needs.