Selective violence

Jesus was pretty violent.

When was the last time your pastor drove people out of church with a whip (John 2)? Or said anything along the lines of: "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?" (Matthew 23:33)? Yep, in terms of non-violent communication, Jesus really missed the mark sometimes.

Please notice two attributes of Jesus' violence.

His anger was centred around the hypocrisy of the Pharisees ("Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites!" is repeated six times in Matthew 23).

It is contact anger - Jesus is engaging with the people he's angry with - not withdrawing (as mentioned by Jim McNeish at a recent daybreak day). Jesus says 'you hypocrites,' rather than 'those hypocrites.' He wasn't telling people about the Pharisees and how bad they were, he addressing them directly - (whether they were listening or not!).

Can we learn some thing from this, as postmodern, self-aware, emotionally intelligent, maybe even 'emergent,' Christians? Many of us have fervent mental anvils of change, on which we regularly hammer out our visions of church, and what it SHOULD be, verbally straightening out on it those ways of doing church that don't tie in with our vision. But, are we selective enough in our violence? And are we seeking to engage the systems of Church that we deride?

See, when I read Brian McClaren, I often think "he's got a point." I also sometimes think "did these people run over his dog?" At various points in his books I just think he sounds a bit... well... grumpy.

Similarly, I was surprised when, at a recent event, a prominent emerging church leader described certain leaders in the Anglican church as 'spineless' for not effecting change more quickly. There was certainly some vitriol in the way he said it.

See, where there is hypocrisy (politicking, prejudice, unforgiveness, one-upmanship, power struggles, wanting to own Ferrari's ), let's challenge it, maybe even with Christ-like violence. However, where people are tied into models of doing church that we find, well, wrong; let's be gracious, and love them, ugly hairy moles and all - remembering that we are not hairy-mole exempt (I know I'm not!), and that "in the same way you judge others, you will be judged," (Matthew 7:2)

And, wherever possible and practical, let's engage people. Talking about a person is reactive, easy, and turns people against each other. Talking to a person is proactive, and useful, and takes courage (because - I don't know about you; but it scares the chorizo out of me!). I know this might be impractical when we're talking about global Christian figures or movements, but maybe 'if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all,' can be a useful tool.

I hope his doesn't come across too critically (or superior): I never want to fight people who, like me, really hunger for change, and relevance, and life and integrity in church, and are too often disappointed by what we see. But, as we break the brittle, sun-calloused soil of religion that's useless and, in some cases, malevolent, let's carefully select what we plough; avoid thoughtless trampling, and pray none of us turn into grumpy, pessimistic old codgers.

D