Take your pick. There are a lot of concepts of God out there and you can choose the one that's right for you. Of course, the logic of this does not escape most of us. If there are a lot of God concepts, and if they are all quite opposed to each other (which they are), then one obvious conclusion is that none of them is true and we can jettison the whole project of deciding which God is real. None is.
However, churches all through the world claim that not only is God real, but that he can be understood and described in a way that is helpful to all people. (In other words, although we can't know everything about God by a very, very long shot, we can know enough.) The core of the Christian understanding of God is that he is three persons, three, tri-, a tri-unity, or Trinity. This is why, for example, we see many churches named "Trinity." A church just down the street from me is called Trinity United. (Actually it's closed, and although that's important, it isn't for this article.)
I think that understanding God as Trinity matters.
But just before I elaborate on that, let me dwell a little longer on my opening sentences: Yes, there are a lot of concepts of God. In competition with the understanding of Trinity, for example, the Muslim understanding is that God is radically one. The Qur'an heaps criticism on those who believe God is somehow three. Actually, the Qur'an has a notion of the Trinity that Christians find bizarre. It assumes that by "Trinity" Christians mean God, Jesus, and Mary, the mother of Jesus. And Christians, along with Muslims, don't abide by that understanding of the Trinity.
But in addition to the Muslim understanding of God as one there are many other God options. Native spiritual leaders have ideas of God, emphasizing God as creator. Made-in-the-U. S. A. religions such as Mormonism, Scientology, Jehovah's Witnesses, and many others have their own understandings of God. Celebrity spiritualites such as Oprah's have certain assumptions about God that would not necessarily fit well with the God concepts of others.
Does seeing God as Trinity, however, offer a way of cutting through the many options, ending up with one that at a deep level, "feels right" to people. I think it does.
First of all, the Trinity is a community. God is certainly one, but one what? At the risk of oversimplifying, I am going to state that God is one community. One. One community of three persons. (Some readers may want me to support what I'm saying by quoting the Bible. If you are one of those, just write me and I'll provide that. I need to keep this a short.)
But how exactly is it helpful that God is a community? In two ways. First, God as a community supports the human experience that we are here to be community. I forget if it was Sartre or Camus who said, "Hell is other people." Perhaps he was having a bad decade or feeling mischievous. In any event he was mistaken. Our origin is rooted in a creator who is himself a community. This is no small matter because it properly relativizes our other urges to out-compete our neighbours or leave them twisting in the wind when they get in trouble. The Trinity delegitimizes violence and means the end of war. It deeply validates the pursuit of fair and just societies. Treat everyone well. No spitting on referees. The Trinity needs to be announced to everyone.
Second, each of the three persons of the Trinity contributes to a balanced understanding of life and the world. Consider God as Creator (or Father). To see God as Creator helps us in seeing the unity of all things living and (apparently) lifeless. There is a oneness, a unity, a continuity in the fabric of the created world. This helps us value the planetary environment and gives us the goal of caring for all the world to the best of our ability. For obvious reasons this needs to be announced in today's world.
Consider Jesus as God. This helps us work through something else. Yes, there is unity in the created world. But there is also disruption, breakdown, injustice, or in two words, sin and evil. This double-headed problem runs very deep. To address this problem Jesus was born, actively taught, was executed, and was raised from the dead (there's a lot more to this story, but again, space considerations). Jesus is God addressing an ugly situation.
All is not well with the world or with us. We need forgiveness, healing, and restoration. The work of God as Jesus Christ provides a way forward where human beings can live with confidence before God, experience restoration, and look forward to the day when that restoration will be complete.
Finally, consider God as Holy Spirit. This brings us into another area, the area of renewed life. While Jesus Christ carved out a path of restoration and re-union with the Creator Father, the Holy Spirit, also God, freely distributes a whole lot of good stuff. These include courage, trust, faith, hope, and above all, love. They also include healings and miracles. If you listen to the stories of Christians you will often accounts of prayers being answered concretely and impressively. And you will find many instances of people living purposeful lives that spread healing and hope to those with whom they have contact. The Spirit is God without borders. He is everywhere, opening people to God and renewing life wherever God is welcomed – and even in some places where he is not.
Wednesday, 29 February 2012
Sunday, 12 February 2012
Aboriginal and Child Activist, Enemy of the Country
Late in 2011 Canadians learned that the RCMP and others have been keeping surveillance on Cindy Blackstock. Blackstock is a noted children's wellness and aboriginal advocate.
In 2007 her organization, the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, filed a human rights complaint against the federal government saying that aboriginal children are not given the same benefits as non-aboriginals. Not long after she filed, Blackstock says, her relationship with the department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development (AAND) "changed." When the department held a meeting with Ontario Native chiefs, she was barred from the room. A security guard was posted to make sure she complied.
That event moved Blackstock to make a request under the Access to Information Act. Over a year and half later the surveilance file that AAND had gathered landed on her desk. It disturbed Blackstock to find that government staff had followed her across the country to over 75 meetings. One incident was particularly revealing to her. A government staff used their personal identity after hours to go on Facebook and photograph her profile page. This suggests to Blackstock that AAND did not want to use its own identity when looking for her personal information.
According to one reporter, "This is the latest in a series of revelations about the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and its penchant for keeping tabs on its aboriginal citizens. Back in June, Mohawk Nation activist Russell Diabo, and Shiri Pasternak, a Toronto-based writer, researcher and organizer, brought to light similar surveillance that involved not only AAND, but also the RCMP. Such monitoring of aboriginal groups had begun with the advent of Harper’s first government in 2005."
That the government and the police should monitor Canadians, including aboriginal leaders, where there is a reasonable possibility of violence is not something most Canadians would dispute. But what has Cindy Blackstock done that is so threatening?
An article posted by the Ontario Association of Social Workers reveals her as a thoughtful worker for the integration of ethics and social work. "[Blackstock] calls upon social workers to actively engage in reconciliation, beginning with an active learning process informed by [aboriginal] history, and inspired by [aboriginal] values and vision. She notes that: 'It takes courage to understand that sometimes it was we, "the social work good guys", who were doing the harm. By engaging in reconciliation, we will be part of co-creating a social work profession nested within Canadian society where aboriginal and non-aboriginal peoples can co-exist in friendship with all their rights recognized.'"
In one of her own papers posted online Blackstock contrasts cultural differences between aboriginal cultures and modern thinking. For example the modern world view emphasizes present and futuristic knowledge while ancestral cultures value knowledge that has held up for a long time in the past. Aboriginal cultures recognize their inter-relatedness with the natural world while modern people see humans as more or less independent of nature, if not dominating it.
Aboriginal people look to integrated stories and practices to address specific issues. In contrast modern techniques emphasize breaking problems down into distinct parts with treatments administered by experts in a supposedly neutral, professional environment. While the aboriginal approach has its weaknesses, the modern approach can make the individual can feel confused and manipulated, more like a cog than a whole person.
Blackstock has a great deal to offer the continuing dialogue between modern and native Canadians. Therefore we can wonder, along with reporters, why she has been treated as an enemy of the country.
This article is based in part on an article by Annette Francis of the Aboriginal People's Television Network, online postings by the Indian Country Today Media Network, and related video files.
In 2007 her organization, the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, filed a human rights complaint against the federal government saying that aboriginal children are not given the same benefits as non-aboriginals. Not long after she filed, Blackstock says, her relationship with the department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development (AAND) "changed." When the department held a meeting with Ontario Native chiefs, she was barred from the room. A security guard was posted to make sure she complied.
That event moved Blackstock to make a request under the Access to Information Act. Over a year and half later the surveilance file that AAND had gathered landed on her desk. It disturbed Blackstock to find that government staff had followed her across the country to over 75 meetings. One incident was particularly revealing to her. A government staff used their personal identity after hours to go on Facebook and photograph her profile page. This suggests to Blackstock that AAND did not want to use its own identity when looking for her personal information.
According to one reporter, "This is the latest in a series of revelations about the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and its penchant for keeping tabs on its aboriginal citizens. Back in June, Mohawk Nation activist Russell Diabo, and Shiri Pasternak, a Toronto-based writer, researcher and organizer, brought to light similar surveillance that involved not only AAND, but also the RCMP. Such monitoring of aboriginal groups had begun with the advent of Harper’s first government in 2005."
That the government and the police should monitor Canadians, including aboriginal leaders, where there is a reasonable possibility of violence is not something most Canadians would dispute. But what has Cindy Blackstock done that is so threatening?
An article posted by the Ontario Association of Social Workers reveals her as a thoughtful worker for the integration of ethics and social work. "[Blackstock] calls upon social workers to actively engage in reconciliation, beginning with an active learning process informed by [aboriginal] history, and inspired by [aboriginal] values and vision. She notes that: 'It takes courage to understand that sometimes it was we, "the social work good guys", who were doing the harm. By engaging in reconciliation, we will be part of co-creating a social work profession nested within Canadian society where aboriginal and non-aboriginal peoples can co-exist in friendship with all their rights recognized.'"
In one of her own papers posted online Blackstock contrasts cultural differences between aboriginal cultures and modern thinking. For example the modern world view emphasizes present and futuristic knowledge while ancestral cultures value knowledge that has held up for a long time in the past. Aboriginal cultures recognize their inter-relatedness with the natural world while modern people see humans as more or less independent of nature, if not dominating it.
Aboriginal people look to integrated stories and practices to address specific issues. In contrast modern techniques emphasize breaking problems down into distinct parts with treatments administered by experts in a supposedly neutral, professional environment. While the aboriginal approach has its weaknesses, the modern approach can make the individual can feel confused and manipulated, more like a cog than a whole person.
Blackstock has a great deal to offer the continuing dialogue between modern and native Canadians. Therefore we can wonder, along with reporters, why she has been treated as an enemy of the country.
This article is based in part on an article by Annette Francis of the Aboriginal People's Television Network, online postings by the Indian Country Today Media Network, and related video files.
The Real Jesus "Hates Religion"
Jefferson Bethke, a young Seattle poet, believes that Jesus hates religion. It will surprise some readers that Jesus hated it because most of us think that he founded the Christian religion. Yet, that's exactly the point of Bethke's YouTube video.
The four minute clip has gone viral and has spawned video variations such as "Why I hate religion and Jesus too," and "Why I love Jesus and religion too." Heavy hitters in North American media such as CNN have been paying attention to it too.
So have critics. Fr. Dwight Longenecker writes in an online article for First Things that trying to cut Jesus away from religion is a lost cause. For example, as he notes, it is almost impossible to know anything about Jesus except from the New Testament (part of the Christian Bible), and the New Testament was written, collected, printed, and reprinted by the church, a religious community.
What exactly then is Bethke's beef? In the first part of the video he tells us. The church has started religious wars. It builds huge buildings while neglecting the poor. It claims to be affiliated with the U. S.'s Republican Party. And it allowed him, once a church kid, to parade his righteousness while hiding his regular use of porn.
Well, what about these complaints? First, Bethke equates church with religion. That's a problem, as we've already seen. But let that pass for now.
Ok, what about the wars thing? Yes, wars in Europe during the 1600s were fueled by different understandings of Christianity or church, that is, religion. On the other hand, the strongest proponents of pacifism are Christians. Canada's James Loney, for example, practices his pacifism as a member of Christian Peacemakers. And Christian pacifism is promoted by officially recognized Christian groups, "religious" bodies, such as the Mennonite Church.
What about constructing expensive buildings versus taking care of the poor? Well sure, there are expensive church buildings. The other day I visited St. Patrick's Catholic Cathedral in Manhattan. Big. Opulent, sort of. Expensive, no doubt. And within a few blocks I saw a poor woman, crumpled up on the sidewalk, alive, but barely. A clear example of the church's neglect of the poor and its greed.
But really? That same church, I'll bet my Starbucks Christmas gift card, funds outreach to the poor of New York just as the churches of (fill in any other North American city) are helping the poor, providing food, volunteers, and space. You don't have to look very hard to see that the church is a leading, perhaps the leading, provider of assistance to the poor in the Third World.
And of course, Bethke's use of porn when he was a teen was not good and hopefully he's off that. It seems a little odd though for him to blame his church for his teenage double standard.
Still, I credit Bethke for trying to show what Jesus was all about. Definitely he was against the hypocrisy of the Jewish religious leaders of his day who, while talking up the law of God were plotting to kill him. Incidentally, the fact that Jesus and most of his original followers were Jewish means that discrimination against Jews has no place among Christians; admiration would be more fitting. Jesus did not reject the poor or people found to be in sexual or relational difficulties. He sought them out, welcomed them, and gave them a new path. He did not ask his followers to build buildings but he did show the way for people to love each other even though such love can be very risky, very costly.
Bethke is off base about some things. But he is right on to try cutting through some layers of confusion to get to the real Jesus. Jesus is the one to watch and the controversial video may help spark some needed clarification.
The four minute clip has gone viral and has spawned video variations such as "Why I hate religion and Jesus too," and "Why I love Jesus and religion too." Heavy hitters in North American media such as CNN have been paying attention to it too.
So have critics. Fr. Dwight Longenecker writes in an online article for First Things that trying to cut Jesus away from religion is a lost cause. For example, as he notes, it is almost impossible to know anything about Jesus except from the New Testament (part of the Christian Bible), and the New Testament was written, collected, printed, and reprinted by the church, a religious community.
What exactly then is Bethke's beef? In the first part of the video he tells us. The church has started religious wars. It builds huge buildings while neglecting the poor. It claims to be affiliated with the U. S.'s Republican Party. And it allowed him, once a church kid, to parade his righteousness while hiding his regular use of porn.
Well, what about these complaints? First, Bethke equates church with religion. That's a problem, as we've already seen. But let that pass for now.
Ok, what about the wars thing? Yes, wars in Europe during the 1600s were fueled by different understandings of Christianity or church, that is, religion. On the other hand, the strongest proponents of pacifism are Christians. Canada's James Loney, for example, practices his pacifism as a member of Christian Peacemakers. And Christian pacifism is promoted by officially recognized Christian groups, "religious" bodies, such as the Mennonite Church.
What about constructing expensive buildings versus taking care of the poor? Well sure, there are expensive church buildings. The other day I visited St. Patrick's Catholic Cathedral in Manhattan. Big. Opulent, sort of. Expensive, no doubt. And within a few blocks I saw a poor woman, crumpled up on the sidewalk, alive, but barely. A clear example of the church's neglect of the poor and its greed.
But really? That same church, I'll bet my Starbucks Christmas gift card, funds outreach to the poor of New York just as the churches of (fill in any other North American city) are helping the poor, providing food, volunteers, and space. You don't have to look very hard to see that the church is a leading, perhaps the leading, provider of assistance to the poor in the Third World.
And of course, Bethke's use of porn when he was a teen was not good and hopefully he's off that. It seems a little odd though for him to blame his church for his teenage double standard.
Still, I credit Bethke for trying to show what Jesus was all about. Definitely he was against the hypocrisy of the Jewish religious leaders of his day who, while talking up the law of God were plotting to kill him. Incidentally, the fact that Jesus and most of his original followers were Jewish means that discrimination against Jews has no place among Christians; admiration would be more fitting. Jesus did not reject the poor or people found to be in sexual or relational difficulties. He sought them out, welcomed them, and gave them a new path. He did not ask his followers to build buildings but he did show the way for people to love each other even though such love can be very risky, very costly.
Bethke is off base about some things. But he is right on to try cutting through some layers of confusion to get to the real Jesus. Jesus is the one to watch and the controversial video may help spark some needed clarification.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)