Mark 11:27-12:12 Again they came to Jerusalem. As he was walking in the temple, the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders came to him and said, ‘By what authority are you doing these things? Who gave you this authority to do them?’ Jesus said to them, ‘I will ask you one question; answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. Did the baptism of John come from heaven, or was it of human origin? Answer me.’ They argued with one another, ‘If we say, “From heaven”, he will say, “Why then did you not believe him?” But shall we say, “Of human origin”?’—they were afraid of the crowd, for all regarded John as truly a prophet. So they answered Jesus, ‘We do not know.’ And Jesus said to them, ‘Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.’
There are times when Christians feel forced to join in with a “cause” in the world. Most often we are presented with a claim for justice in this “cause.” We are told that to be silent in the midst of this injustice is to already make a choice to join in with the sustaining of that injustice. And so we rush to Twitter, FB and other means to launch our own voices in the protest. We know very little about what is actually going on.
I argue there are times (ALTHOUGH NOT ALWAYS!!) when Christians best serve the in breaking Kingdom of God by not joining with the cause in the terms as set down by the prevailing ideology. My argument is that many times the discourse sets down the terms of entry violently. To agree or disagree with the issue in the terms set down for us sets us up to participate in violence and antagonism, indeed it further inflames the antagonism and violence. By entering in on these terms, we do not change the status quo. Instead violence and antagonism works to harden the status quo further and deeper. And God, I believe, in Christ, has shown us the way of justice is not through violence but presence. God, I suggest, does not work for redemption (although he can work for preservation) via the world’s terms of violence. He shall change the world through His presence, reconciliation and the relational socio economic sharing that comes through presence.
It is therefore inevitable that there will be times when the Christian will not enter into the world on the terms set down by the given ideology because that ideology runs on violence. Instead we will choose to enter that place and be present to the other, listen for long periods of time, discern the justice of God and then , provoke, proclaim gospel and work for justice in that local place. This kind of presence could be interpreted as silence. But I don’t think it is. I think it is presence.
Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi, Einstein etc. all said something like “to be silent is to be complicit” with evil and injustice. I suggest MLKjr. was able to say this because he could assume monolithic cultural conditions where say American racism in post WW2 America was ubiquitous across the USA. He had spent much time in the south and the north. There was enough of a singular culture (say post WW2 American culture) that we in Chicago (he assumed) had the wherewithal to discern the justice from afar even when we had no stake or involvement or participation in the south. MLKjr. had showed the racism of the whites in the north was complicit and even more insidious than the racism in the south. It made sense to call for the joining together of the voices from the north and the south to work for a nation wide racial justice.
And yet MLKjr recognized that there were also times when we do not enter the frey on the terms set down by the wider discourse. His stance of nonviolence was driven by this recognition. His refusal the first time to carry out the Selma march to Birmingham can be seen as such a refusal because he saw the march as playing right into the terms as laid down by the racists powers of the south. They would be bludgeoned and become part of the violent narrative discrediting what God would do in this movement. From the Birmingham prison he wrote of the need to be bodily present when some white elites had accused him of agitating in coming from Georgia to Alabama. Presence was important to MLK jr.
Jesus it appears in Mark 11:27ff refuses to enter the debate of the Temple powers (described quite broadly as “chief priests, scribes and elders” ). Instead he is present, asking questions, revealing the contradictions. He refuses to enter the ideology of Israeli nationalism on its own terms. (He refuses to define authority within the Temple/Talmudic structures of the Pharisees). He does all this as he gets ready to enter Jerusalem. There he becomes present to the powers and principalities and refuses the way of violence even unto death. And God of course used that presence not only to reveal the evil of the world, but to upend it and reverse it.
There are times therefore to not enter the frey, but in fact gather into a space to be present to what God is doing in this place refusing the terms of the debate as set down by the antagonism at work in society. Be present, be with the marginalized, ask questions, listen intently, resist the evil and push for reconciliation. Even a just cause can be used by devious forces to rally a people against another people, create a war of destruction, and just maintain a status quo, which almost always favors the forces in power. Presence is the ultimate pathway towards resisting evil and can often be perceived as “silence.” But it’s not. Presence is more powerful. It sits, asks questions, to reveal the forces at work, to make way for another way.
This not a blanket rejection of vocalism in activism. There are times when twitter/fb posts do the much needed job of awakening a wider populace to injustice. There are times when gathered voices move a society to preserve a people from further victumization. But there are times as well when all this chatter creates more violence from afar hindering the local work of justice. It creates conditions for slactivism. It takes the focus off local communal engagement of presence by communities of the King. So I’m pushing for more of this kind of discernment. What say you?
Missio Alliance Comment Policy
The Missio Alliance Writing Collectives exist as a ministry of writing to resource theological practitioners for mission. From our Leading Voices to our regular Writing Team and those invited to publish with us as Community Voices, we are creating a space for thoughtful engagement of critical issues and questions facing the North American Church in God’s mission. This sort of thoughtful engagement is something that we seek to engender not only in our publishing, but in conversations that unfold as a result in the comment section of our articles.
Unfortunately, because of the relational distance introduced by online communication, “thoughtful engagement” and “comment sections” seldom go hand in hand. At the same time, censorship of comments by those who disagree with points made by authors, whose anger or limited perspective taints their words, or who simply feel the need to express their own opinion on a topic without any meaningful engagement with the article or comment in question can mask an important window into the true state of Christian discourse. As such, Missio Alliance sets forth the following suggestions for those who wish to engage in conversation around our writing:
1. Seek to understand the author’s intent.
If you disagree with something the an author said, consider framing your response as, “I hear you as saying _________. Am I understanding you correctly? If so, here’s why I disagree. _____________.
2. Seek to make your own voice heard.
We deeply desire and value the voice and perspective of our readers. However you may react to an article we publish or a fellow commenter, we encourage you to set forth that reaction is the most constructive way possible. Use your voice and perspective to move conversation forward rather than shut it down.
3. Share your story.
One of our favorite tenants is that “an enemy is someone whose story we haven’t heard.” Very often disagreements and rants are the result of people talking past rather than to one another. Everyone’s perspective is intimately bound up with their own stories – their contexts and experiences. We encourage you to couch your comments in whatever aspect of your own story might help others understand where you are coming from.
In view of those suggestions for shaping conversation on our site and in an effort to curate a hospitable space of open conversation, Missio Alliance may delete comments and/or ban users who show no regard for constructive engagement, especially those whose comments are easily construed as trolling, threatening, or abusive.