A Quaker View of John’s Gospel

We just finished our home study of the "subversive wisdom" of John's Gospel, led by Bert Newton,  and it went very well, with a dozen or so people showing up at each session. Jill sent out this note of gratitude to all those who attended:

We had a wonderful four-week study on the Gospel of John. We wish to thank those of you who were able to come. I was personally very moved by Bert’s insight into the political context of the day and how subversive Jesus was, but also how wise he was…. I have never seen the parallels of lady wisdom from Proverbs 8 and how Jesus was portrayed in this book. I found it very empowering. Thank you Bert!

On the final week, I was able to share  a few "subversive" Quaker ideas about John's Gospel, based on my experience and what I learned from studying the Quaker theologian Howard Brinton:

1) The Inward Light of Christ is in everyone (John 1:9), thought not everyone recognizes or acts upon it. This means we can find the Light in those of other religions, and even our "enemies."

2) If Christ is the vine and we are branches (John 15:5), we can be one with Christ and with God so there isno need for hierarchies, or for leaders, in Christ's beloved community: we can have direct access to Christ/God, just as a branch has direct access to the vine.

3) We can become "friends" of God or Christ if we are willing to sacrifice our egos on the altar of love (John 15:15).

In addition to addressing the questions below, and having a very lively discussion, we sang two popular Quaker songs based on the Gospel of John, both composed by Sydney Carter: "Lord of the Dance" and "The George Fox Song." Cody Love Lowry, a young Friend, led us in singing these songs, accompanied by his ukulele. Our four-week bible study ended on an upbeat note, and a good time was had by all.

Howard Haines Brinton (1884–1973) was an author, professor and director of Pendle Hill (a Quaker center for Study and Contemplation) whose work influenced the Religious Society of Friends movement for much of the 20th century. His books ranged from Quaker journal anthologies to philosophical and historical dissertations on the faith, establishing him as a prominent commentator on the Society of Friends. His most important work was  Friends for 300 Years (published in 1952 to commemorate the 300^th anniversary of Quakerism), which is still the most widely read and influential book about Quakerism among liberal, unprogrammed Friends. Brinton was a student of Rufus Jones, trained in physics as well as philosophy and religion. During his final years he wrote three seminal pamphlets examining the theology/philosophy of John's Gospel from a Quaker perspective. The following handout is based on ideas by Howard Brinton and examples from my own experience and readings.

“The true light that enlightens everyone was coming into the world” (John 1:9).

 What do you think John means by the “true light that enlightens everyone?” How have you experienced this light in yourself, and/or in others?

The so-called “Quaker text” (John 1:9) was interpreted by Quakers to mean that the Christ light/logos shines, with varying degrees of intensity, in everyone, though many do not recognize or follow it. According to Quakers, Jesus is the most complete expression of the Christ light/logos (as George Fox said, Christ possessed this light “without measure”), but glimmerings of this light can be found in every person and religion (e.g. “the Golden Rule”).

Practical applications: George Fox called Quakers to “answer [respond to] ‘that of God’ in everyone,” whether Christian, pagan, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, etc. by being “patterns and examples” of Christ’s love.

Quakers believe that if we “live in the power and life that takes away the occasion of war,” we should never kill anyone through war, public execution, or other means because everyone, even someone who hates and persecutes us, has the Christ light (“that of God”) within him or her.

 Quaker missionaries do not “import” Christ, but “reveal” Christ to those who haven’t heard of him. Hence Zablon Isaac Malenge, one of the leading theologians of Kenya and former General Secretary of Nairobi Yearly Meeting, had this remarkable take on missionaries and the universal basis of Quakerism (and of Christianity): “I will tell you a mystery. Many people in this world are practicing Quakerism without being aware of it. Some have never heard of it and yet they are practicing it. Even our great-grandparents might have practiced Quakerism long before missionaries came here. Quakerism is a religion of the soul, the indwelling Spirit, the light within, the light of Christ, the Seed. Missionaries did not bring it to us, but the missionaries revealed it to us and said, ‘This is Quakerism.’” (Early Christianity Revised in the Perspective of Friends in Kenya, Diana’s Book Library Services,Kenya, 2003, rev. 2012, p. 79).

Other biblical passages used by Brinton and George Fox to explain Quaker Universalism: “the gospel which ye have heard and which was preached in [less exactly rendered ‘to’] every creature which is under heaven” (Col 1:23) and “for the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all” (Titus 2:11).

“I am the vine and you are the branches. Those who remain in me, and I in them, will produce much fruit. For apart from me you can do nothing.” (John: 15:5)

What do you think that Jesus is saying about the relationship between Christ and his followers by using the metaphor of a vine? How is this relationship different from the way that the relationship between God and human beings is conventionally/traditionally understood? What kind of community/society is implied by this “organic” metaphor? How is this kind of community “subversive” or counter to the dominant culture?

 This passage relates to the Quaker “testimony” of Community   (a “testimony” is an outward expression of an inward  experience of the Light). Brinton argued that while traditional Protestant promoted individualism and capitalism, Quakerism promoted communitarianism. Quaker worship fosters “group mysticism” which gives the group an “organic” (inward) sense of unity and connectedness with Spirit and each other. This is the experiential basis behind John's words: “I am the vine and you are the branches.” Quakers believed that Christ lives within us, and through us, and is (or should be) our primary Guide (rather than some external authority like scripture or tradition).

 “This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.” John 15:15.

What does Jesus mean by love? What kind of relationship does he want with us? What kind of religious community/society would this kind of relationship with God/Christ and with other people lead to?

Early Friends practiced this kind of love in powerful ways. During the 17^th century, a time when over 15,000 Quakers were imprisoned for their beliefs, and many died in prison,  164 Friends signed this petition and sent to Parliament in 1659:

We, in love to our brethren that lie in prisons and houses of correction and dungeons, and many in fetters and irons, and have been cruelly beat by the cruel gaolers, and many have been persecuted to death, and have died in prison, and many lie sick and weak in prison and so straw, so we, in love to our brethren, do offer up our bodies and selves to you, for to put us as lambs into the same dungeons and houses of correction....For we are willing to lay down our lives for our brethren, and to take their sufferings upon us

How do we in our current age demonstrate our commitment to the kind of love that Christ commanded? How do we become “friends of God” as well as genuine friends of each other?

Hypocrisy of July 4th

At today's meeting of Interfaith Communities United for Justice and Peace (ICUJP),  our President Steve Rohde read, in his booming lawyer's voice, the famous fiery speech that Frederick Douglas gave in Rochester, NY, on the 4th of July in 1852. Here's an account of this speech, which includes the interesting but little known fact that Quakers helped Douglass raise the money to gain his freedom:

Frederick Douglass (1817-1895) was the best known and most influential African American leader of the 1800s. He was born a slave in Maryland but managed to escape to the North in 1838.

He traveled to Massachusetts and settled in New Bedford, working as a laborer to support himself. In 1841, he attended a convention of the Massachusetts Antislavery Society and quickly came to the attention of its members, eventually becoming a leading figure in the New England antislavery movement.

In 1845, Douglass published his autobiography, "The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: an American Slave." With the revelation that he was an escaped slave, Douglass became fearful of possible re-enslavement and fled to Great Britain and stayed there for two years, giving lectures in support of the antislavery movement in America. With the assistance of English Quakers, Douglass raised enough money to buy his own his freedom and in 1847 he returned to America as a free man.

He settled in Rochester, New York, where he published The North Star, an abolitionist newspaper. He directed the local underground railroad which smuggled escaped slaves into Canada and also worked to end racial segregation in Rochester's public schools.

In 1852, the leading citizens of Rochester asked Douglass to give a speech as part of their Fourth of July celebrations. Douglass accepted their invitation.

In his speech, however, Douglass delivered a scathing attack on the hypocrisy of a nation celebrating freedom and independence with speeches, parades and platitudes, while, within its borders, nearly four million humans were being kept as slaves:

What to the American slave is your Fourth of July? I answer, a day that reveals to him more than all other days of the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mock; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy - a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation of the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of these United States at this very hour.


http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/douglass.htm

Fortunately, American still has voices willing to speak out like Frederick Douglas against the hypocrisy of our Fourth of July hoopla. Shahid Buttar is a civil rights lawyer, hip-hop MC, independent columnist, grassroots community organizer, singer and poet. Professionally, he directs a program combating racial & religious profiling at a non-profit legal advocacy and educational organization representing the American Muslim community.

Our only hope for change is to be honest about what is really happening in our country and in the world, and then do what we can to live up to our highest ideals. This, for me, is what ICUJP is all about.

What Do We Celebrate this July Fourth? July 4, 2012 by Shahid Buttar

When the United States championed democracy, freedom, and opportunity, it made sense to celebrate the Fourth of July. But are we still promoting those values? If we are paragons of neither opportunity nor freedom, what exactly do we celebrate today?

 

Our Statue of Liberty bears an inscription welcoming the world’s “tired and poor…huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” Our open arms which once greeted strangers (on whose backs our country was built), however, have been replaced by laws like Arizona’s SB 1070, copycat laws around the country, and the recent Supreme Court decision upholding provisions that encourage racial profiling.
Liberty itself is a fading memory, a lyric in an anthem that few Americans today understand, even as millions sing it at sporting events and during today’s holiday.
Robert Samuelson’s Is the U.S. a land of liberty or equality? reviews a duality within America’s political culture. Samuelson writes that “Americans’ self-identity springs from the beliefs on which this country was founded,” including values of equality and liberty that often stand in tension. He correctly notes that “in today’s politically poisoned climate, righteousness is at a premium and historical reality at a discount,” which in turns helps “explain[] why love of country has become a double-edged sword, dividing us when it might unite.” While Samuelson’s observation of political dysfunction is compelling, his analysis is flawed. It examines a conflict between two values, neither of which is visible in today’s United States.

Samuelson first addresses equality, reflected in our repudiation of aristocracy. Whereas “[i]n most societies, people are marked by where they were born….[Americans are united in] belief that no one is automatically better than anyone else simply by virtue of birth.”
As an immigrant, brought to the US to pursue freedom and economic opportunity unavailable in the land of my parents’ birth, I deeply appreciate this history. But we must recognize it as historical, rather than contemporary.

Birth doesn’t matter in America? Tell that to Steve Forbes, or the late Ted Kennedy, or other politicians who coast to office on the heels of familial wealth or reputation. Writing alongside Samuelson in the Washington Post, Harold Meyerson notes that:

As to economic equality and the political equality with which it is inextricably intertwined, the picture is bleak. The mega-banks that plunged us into deep recession have had the political power to forestall their breakup. A handful of billionaires continues to donate unprecedented sums to election campaigns. The share of national income and wealth [secured by] the vast majority of Americans continues to decline.

Opportunity is not the only value that we’ve resigned in recent years. America’s reputation as the “land of the free” has also faded, withering under a bipartisan consensus since 9/11 that federal authority to protect national security must trump individual rights, as well as checks & balances on executive power.

The American vision of liberty that brought democracy and human rights to the world has dimmed, clouded by executive secrecy (demonstrated by Samuelson’s and Meyerson’s colleague Dana Priest and researcher William Arkin), torture with impunity, assassination without trial, pervasive dragnet surveillance, and unapologetic racial & ethnic profiling pervading the wars on drugs, terror, and immigration.

We may remain a land of many things, but freedom is not among them.
Mass incarceration has decimated minority communities, creating a humanitarian crisis apparent in the overwhelming proportion of the world’s prisoners held on our shores.
Congress authorized the National Security Agency in 2008 to secretly capture and datamine all your emails and phone calls, and now prepares to extend that power again this year. A law signed by President Obama on New Year’s Eve gives the military authority to kidnap and detain any American without trial. Congress had already given the Pentagon power to withhold evidence of its human rights abuses.

Meanwhile, the line between military and police is blurring, as SWAT teams, aerial drones, armored personnel carriers, and fusion centers transform local police departments from public safety agencies into a militarized occupation force deployed across the country.
Never in human history has a state enjoyed such unfettered access to the minds of its subjects (ahem, citizens). And rarely in our nation’s history have agencies, and the officials who command them, wielded such dramatic power.

Information omniscience, combined with the authority to monitor, detain, torture or kill at whim — each of which has been the object of bipartisan consensus across the Bush & Obama administrations — will be a terrifying combination when those powers inevitably fall into the hands of less conscientious leaders.

Between the liberty and equality values that have long contended for our nation’s legacy, we have managed to lose both. Having forgotten the ideals that once defined our nation, what do we celebrate this Fourth of July? This is no time to merely sing the national anthem, or mouth empty slogans about freedom. This is a time to take action to restore the promise of liberty our Founders attempted, by writing our Constitution, to bequeath to us.

Our flag is still there. But where is the nation it once inspired?

Celebrating Interdependence Day

It's been three years since I started this blog on what I called "Interdependence Day." I was still grieving for the loss of my beloved wife Kathleen, but I was also looking forward hopefully to a new chapter of my life--one in which I could devote myself full-time and wholeheartedly to peace and justice in a way that would honor my wife's memory.  I am grateful to God that I have had this opportunity and to be joined in this work by my new wife Jill, who is also deeply committed to peace and justice. Together we have become a dynamic duo!

As I reflect on this year's 4th of July, a time in which our country still spends more of its resources on war and prisons than on education and health care, I feel it is fitting to honor those who have truly stood for freedom and peace.

I want to begin by honoring the Quakers who, in 1776, came to unity that it was un-Christian to own slaves and that any Quaker who owned slaves would be disowned by the Religious Society of Friends. A year earlier, Quakers in Philadelphia formed the first abolitionist society. These are events that deserve to be more widely known and celebrated.

I also want to honor my dear friend Stephen Longfellow Fiske, a gifted singer/songwriter who wrote this beautiful "Earth Anthem" to the tune of "The Star-Spangled Banner," transforming a song about "bombs bursting in air" to a song about the "clear skies of freedom":

Earth Anthem

O say can we see

by the one light in all

our Earth to embrace

at the call of all nations

where our children can play

in a world without war

where we stand hand in hand

in the grace of creation

where the rivers run clean

through the forests of green

where the cities stand tall

in the clear skies of freedom

O say do our hearts sing

for harmony and love forever

on the planet of our birth

blessed with peace on Earth. (See http://www.fiskemusic.com/earthanthem/)

Thirdly, I want to honor Stephen Rohde, president of ICUJP and one of the founders of Progressive Jewish Alliance. During the dark days of  the Bush ear, this fearless Constitutional lawyer and activist wrote this powerful response to the escalating "war on terror" which was read  at the ICUJP Rally in Support of the National Moratorium to Stop the War on Iraq (March 5, 2003). Sadly, what he says about Bush's foreign policy and human rights record applies also to the Obama administration:

 

A New Declaration of Independence

from King George W. Bush 227 years ago, faced with a tyrant named King George, the American people declared their independence. Today faced with another tyrant named George, who acts like a King, the people must once again declare our independence. We reaffirm that all men and women are created equal. That we are endowed with certain unalienable Rights, including Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men and Women deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it. When a long train of abuses and usurpations evinces a design to reduce the People under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such Government and to provide new Guards for their future security. The history of the present King George is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny This King George has detained citizens and non-citizens alike, incommunicado, without charging them with any crimes and without affording them the right to legal counsel. This King George has eavesdropped on suspects consulting with their attorneys. This King George has entered homes and offices for unannounced "sneak and peak" searches. This King George has authorized his FBI to seize personal records from libraries and bookstores. This King George has reinstated Cointelpro to resume the infiltration and surveillance of domestic religious and political groups. This King George has banned the press and public from all deportation hearings. This King George has recruited Americans to spy on citizens and non-citizens alike. This King George lured students and visitors from predominately Muslim nations to submit to special INS registrations and then rounded them up and held them in detention, without access to their lawyers and families. This King George has empowered Admiral John Poindexter to invade the privacy of all Americans by collecting their telephone records, credit card records, medical records and e-mail messages. This King George has ordered his Justice Department to design new laws stripping Americans of their U.S. citizenship. This King George has threatened those who object to his abuses that they are only aiding the terrorist and giving ammunition to America's enemies. At every stage of these Oppressions we have Petitioned for Redress yet we have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant is unfit to be the ruler of a free People. In all this, he has set the Bill of Rights aflame, leaving our sacred charter in ashes. With a firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence and Human Rights, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. (See icujp.org)

*******

Finally, I'd like to end on a positive note by honoring that dynamic duo of philosophic liberalism, Ariel and Will Durant. In  1945, they wrote something called the "Declaration of Interdependence" which captures the highest ideals of this time and is still relevant to our own--displaying a spirit of cooperation, tolerance and good will that is the essence of today's interfaith movement. The story of this amazing document is told at the Durants' website:

On April 8, 1944, Pulitzer Prize-winning philosopher Will Durant was approached by two leaders in the Jewish and Christian communities, Mr. Meyer David and Dr. Christian Richard, about collaborating on a project of social significance. Recalled Durant:

Dr. Richard and Mr. David came to me with suggestions to organize a movement, to raise moral standards. I talked them out of it, and suggested, instead, they work against racial intolerance. I outlined the argument, and proposed a Declaration of Interdependence. I thought the phrase was original with me, but found it had been used before -- however, only in regard to international political independence. I asked them to draw up such a Declaration, and promised to sign it if I liked it.

Durant, David, and Richard outlined their plans for the movement and drafted a declaration that represented their core beliefs. This document Durant called "A Declaration of Interdependence". In Ariel and Will Durant's dual autobiography, Will Durant expressed his reasoning for his recommendation:

Just as independence has been the motto of states and individuals since 1750, so the motto of the coming generations should be interdependence. And just as no state can now survive by its own unaided power, so no democracy can long endure without recognizing and encouraging the interdependence of the racial and religious groups composing it.

Here's what their Declaration of Interdependence says:

Human progress having reached a high level through respect for the liberty and dignity of men, it has become desirable to re-affirm these evident truths:

• That differences of race, color, and creed are natural, and that diverse groups, institutions, and ideas are stimulating factors in the development of man;
• That to promote harmony in diversity is a responsible task of religion and statesmanship;
• That since no individual can express the whole truth, it is essential to treat with understanding and good will those whose views differ from our own;
• That by the testimony of history intolerance is the door to Violence, brutality and dictatorship; and
• That the realization of human interdependence and solidarity is the best guard of civilization.
• Therefore, we solemnly resolve, and invite everyone to join in united action.
• To uphold and promote human fellowship through mutual consideration and respect;
• To champion human dignity and decency, and to safeguard these without distinction of race, or color, or creed;
• To strive in concert with others to discourage all animosities arising from these differences, and to unite all groups in the fair play of civilized life.

ROOTED in freedom, bonded in the fellowship of danger, sharing everywhere a common human blood, we declare again that all men are brothers, and that mutual tolerance is the price of liberty.

Note: The Declaration of Interdependence was introduced into the Congressional Record on October 1, 1945 by Hon. Ellis E. Patterson. (If you'd like to sign on to this document, see http://www.willdurant.com/interdependence.htm)

Why Quakers did not celebrate the Fourth of July

The Missing Peace: The Search for Nonviolent Alternatives
in United States History by James Juhnke and Carol Hunter,
 (2004) discusses the nonviolent approach of the Quakers
during the American Revolution

As a child, I loved the Fourth of July and look forward each year to going to the fireworks display at Nassau Stadium in Princeton. But when I grew up and became a Quaker, I began to question  the pervasive violence of July 4th--the orgy of fireworks that makes some parts of our cities seem like war zones. When I hear the line "Bombs bursting in air gave proof through the night that our flag was still there," I don't think of the British attacking Washington, DC; I think of Hiroshima, Dresden, the carpet bombing of Vietnam, and the drones that now are permitted to kill anyone, anywhere in the world, as long as our President gives his imperial seal of approval. That's why I never stand up for the National Anthem.

As the Fourth of July approaches, it is worth noting that Quakers did not celebrate this holiday, and it cost them dearly:

"The First official Fourth of July celebration did not happen until 1781, but on July 4^th, 1776 there was some celebration in Philadelphia (Wood 121-122). In 1777 there were more celebrations than that of the first year (122). That day was also marked by violence. That year some homes of the Quakers were vandalized because others believed the Quakers were not patriotic because they did not celebrate the Fourth of July (122). The Quakers did not celebrate the Fourth of July because of their religious beliefs (122). Quakers did not “celebrate holidays that commemorated military victories” (122). http://americanwiki.pbworks.com/w/page/12595391/The%20Fourth%20of%20July


We are a nation that imagines itself to be peaceful, yet is the "largest purveyor of war in the world," as Martin Luther King once said, referring to the US arms trade (where we are still number 1). Americans believe passionantely in the myth of redemptive violence, and equate freedom with violence, because we imagine our nation could not have become free without a bloody revolution.

The Quakers in Philadelphia believed otherwise. They sent emissaries to negotiate with the British. They refused to accept tea that had been taxed, but instead of throwing it into the Delaware River, they quietly paid the British merchants to take it back to England. They did what they could to avoid war, and I believe the Quakers were right.

The example of Canada and Australia show that it was possible to achieve independence without bloodshed. It took time and patience, and I'm sure, a bit of cunning, but think of all the lives that were saved.

The Quaker historian and theologian Howard Brinton once wrote an article called "What If," imagining what might have happened if the Quaker emissaries had been successful and the Americans hadn't fought the British. We cannot know for sure how history might have unfolded absent "the shot heard round the world," but Brinton imagines the world might have been more peaceful if the Americans and British had stayed on more congenial terms. Perhaps slavery could have been abolished without a Civil War. And perhaps the Germans would not have launched the Great War if the English and Americans were more closely allied. One thing I know for certain: Francis Scott Key would never have written a national anthem about "bombs bursting in air."

Another thing I know for certain: my fellow countrymen have strayed far from the teachings of the one who said,  "The truth will set you free."

I am grateful to Lowell Noble, author of "From Oppression to Jubilee Justice," who recently wrote a meditation on the Fourth of July that speaks to me as a Quaker. I make it a practice never to say the "Pledge of Allegiance" or sing the "Star-Spangled Banner" because I have already pledged allegiance to a higher authority, the Prince of Peace.

 A Fourth of July Meditation on the Pledge of Allegiance

by Lowell Noble

What does "one nation, under God" do? It provides "liberty and justice for all" its citizens. This remarkable phrase "with liberty and justice for all" is a concise and precise summary of both the Jubilee/Sabbatical laws (Lev. 25) and the New Testament kingdom of God (Isa. 9:6-7; 61:1-4; and Luke 4:18-19).

 The famous cracked Liberty Bell has this biblical inscription: "Proclaim liberty through all the land unto all the inhabitants." The full message of the Jubilee ties liberty (freedom for the poor and oppressed) with doing justice (restoring land to the poor). The Liberty Bell precedes the Pledge by 140 years. Both the Liberty Bell (1752) and the Pledge (1892) emphasize the same point---liberty---, as does the Declaration of Independence (1776)---"Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." But only the Pledge specifically ties liberty and justice together. If I were given permission to change one word in the Declaration, I would make the following change: "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Justice."

 What would the priorities be of one nation, under God, that pursues justice; the needs of the poor and oppressed, widows and orphans, immigrants and ethnic groups (our equivalent to the despised Samaritans and Gentiles). Pure religion, according to James, is reaching out to oppressed and neglected widows and orphans. Contrary to the practice of the Pharisees, one nation, under God, does not "neglect justice and the love of God." (Luke 11).

 Are we, as Americans "neglecting justice and the love of God" or are we pursuing "justice and the love of God" as Job did (Job 29:12-17; NIV and Noble paraphrase):

I rescued the poor who cried for help
and the fatherless who had none to assist him;
The man who was dying blessed me;
I made the widows heart to sing
I put on righteousness as my clothing;
justice was my robe and turban.
I took up the case of the immigrant
I broke the fangs of the oppressor.

If Job were living today, he might add:

I will stop unjust mass incarceration.
I will organize the church to close the racial wealth gap.

A nation of Pharisees would emphasize justice and the law of God---a legalistic justice. A nation under God would emphasize justice and the love of God---a loving justice.

A Small Church with a Huge Heart for the Homeless

Recently, I had the chance to interview Pastor Henry Sideropoulos, a friend of Jill's who has a church in our area (Northwest Pasadena) where many of the poor and homeless live.  His church. aptly named Agape (the Greek word for love), moved into our area because of its commitment to help the homeless.

I deeply empathize with Pastor Sideropolis' concern, and am challenged by his question: are we willing to make room in our hearts and in our homes for the poor?

Let me repeat this challenge to each of us: would happen if each of us who has spare rooms  opened up our homes to house the 1200 or so homeless folk living on our streets and help them get back on their feet?

It isn't easy, as this story makes clear. But the alternative is dreadful. Do we really want to live in a city where homeless people die on the steps of our churches, as recently happened here?

I'm grateful to God for Henry and his small church for caring deeply about the homeless,  and for doing what it can to provide them with a place to stay and an opportunity for a new life.

A Small Church with a Huge Heart for the Homeless

By Pastor Henry Sideropoulos, as Told to Jill Shook and Anthony Manousos

 “We are a small church of 90 members with a deep commitment to helping the homeless. We became specifically concerned with the homeless when we relocated to the east side of Pasadena and began to congregate on Colorado Blvd. by the older small motels and hotels.  We hired Ben Donley as Assistant Pastor in 2004 because of his passion for the homeless. In 2006 we moved to Northwest Pasadena and have been worshipping and praying in this area ever since.  Our concern for the poor and the repressed led to our church members and leaders prayer walking around the neighborhood lifting up their needs to God.

“One of the first homeless persons our church helped was a woman named D.W. who was living in a hotel paying $50 a day. She was an OR nurse who got into trouble because of a man who abused her, took her money and destroyed her car and left her pregnant and penniless. She lost her job and became homeless. She sought help at our church and eventually came to live at my home. We helped her move into Beacon housing’s Agape Court and to obtain two part-time secretarial jobs. D.W. became a member of our church. She was able to bring her four kids from Alabama and they are also part of our church and our youth group. We are pleased that we were able to take her out of the dire conditions she was living in and to be able to unite her family. She is “giving back” through her healing ministry.

“This was the first of three families that our church helped in the early days of our homeless ministry. We helped another homeless family of five move to Ohio, and another we helped move to a village in Japan with their family.

“Another homeless man we helped was mugged and had his neck broken while he was staying in a hotel.  He had to wear a cervical crown and brace. We took him in but unfortunately he died when he fell and re-injured himself. We helped to arrange a wonderful funeral for him and his family who were touched by the love and support that was shown to their loved one in the final weeks of his life.

“There was a homeless couple we met in Northwest Pasadena whom we helped get a Section 8 certificate and a place to stay. They began to attend our church and found fellowship and support both in church and in one of our small groups at the home of one of our members.  Unfortunately, they were kicked out of their housing because of the mental issues they suffered from and two members of our church put them up in their own homes for a total of about eight months.  After that we helped them find a place to stay on Washington Blvd. and helped them move in.

“We also helped a mentally ill member of our church to get into Agape Court.

“We became interested in purchasing a property to help the homeless when my daughter Ariadne got a job working for Door of Hope, a transitional home for homeless families. My brother and I felt this was a great time to buy, so we purchased an 8-unit apartment next to our church so we could use some these units for permanent supportive housing. After attending the Homeless and Housing Network for several years, we approached the City Council and they approved $184,000 to renovate our apartments for affordable housing for 30 years. We also wanted to apply for a grant from the Low Income Investment Fund. They were eager to support us because we also had space for a daycare center for children. Then we hit a roadblock when some of the neighbors complained. We were given permission only to do 4 units of permanent supportive housing and that didn’t work for us financially. As s result, we didn’t get the money from the City Council. This plunged us into a financial crisis. Fortunately, our bank reduced our interest rate from 10 ¼ to 7 per cent. We are still struggling financially. If we could obtain a low interest rate much of our financial problems would be diminished.

“Two families now live in our apartments that are on Section 8. One came from Union Station and another from Door of Hope. One of the families—a husband and wife with four kids—have stayed there for three years and are fairly stable, although the husband struggles with a drug problem. The other is a single mom with three kids, one of whom has severe psychiatric problems. We had problems with her because she wasn’t paying her rent. She is now paying rent, but we feel it’s not a good fit.
“Five members of our church work for Door of Hope. Richard Benjamin, our youth pastor, has been the Program Director of Door of Hope for the last year and a half. His brother Adam was recently hired to assist Tim Peters, the director of Door of Hope, and Jessica Spicer and Anne Tan, two of our members, also work with children at Door of Hope. 

“As a result of our personal connection with Door of Hope we now have five formerly homeless families, now residents at Door of Hope, who are currently attending our church, some of whom have become or are becoming members. Some of them are receiving inner healing and one is leading a Bible study.

“We have an agreement with the Door of Hope that we will try to help “graduates” find affordable housing.”

Pastor Sideropoulos wrote up an inspiring message about a homeless man who died on our doorstep.

"This morning a friend of mine texted me that there was a lot of commotion in front of our Agape’s church building, on Washington Blvd.  I got there as soon as I could, to find a number of police officers and police cars, in front of our sanctuary, busy investigating and taking pictures of a homeless man who died, literally on our doorsteps, next to the Fire Riser!

:I found out later from one of our tenants from the apartments next door that he had had trouble with alcohol and had been to Huntington Hospital many times…the doctors could not do anything more for him.

"I am saddened, of course, that another homeless man has died in the streets of our City.

"God’s message is loud and clear: What is everyone of us doing for this frustrating, pernicious, embarrassing problem, that presents itself on our City’s doorstep?!

"What am I doing? What is Agape Christian Church doing? Project Housed is on its way to immediately house the most vulnerable of our homeless. Too late for this man!

 "I don’t know why he chose that spot to sleep off his last night’s food and drink. Is God trying to tell Agape something?

"We are doing our part, of course: He died on our doorstep because we are no longer in East Pasadena, where we’ve been from 1981 to 2006. We are here, in NW Pasadena. We are part of the continuum of care and are providing Permanent Supportive Housing for those who have been fortunate enough to be housed at Door of Hope, Union Station or other transitional housing and shelters.

"We have actually taken the next step…well, let’s give some more credit to God-God orchestrated this- some of our staff and members of Agape have been working and referring previously homeless families to our church! So we have the privilege of having previously homeless families now become
members, ministers and leaders at Agape!

"God for His wonderful works…in spite of our goals!

"But here’s what’s on my heart this morning: I can’t help but believe there is something else we can do. Something that’s simple, loving, Biblical, and organizationally more effective. Something that is right under our noses.

"It’s simply making a decision that we are going to house everyone of the 1200 homeless people that live on our streets and in our shelters occasionally, by making room for them in our hearts and in our homes!

"There, I’ve said it. Is it radical? Is it impossible? Is it dangerous? How many empty bedrooms in our houses? How many back yards are there in Pasadena? How many empty buildings waiting for…?

 "Even more important: When will the Church Of Christ rise up, come out of its silos, join hands and form the unbroken circle of love and compassion that Jesus was known for, when He walked the streets of this earth?”

The Gospel of John as a dramatic narrative, with a Zen Buddhist perspective

To prepare for our series on the Gospel of John, we invited people to our home to watch the film version of this story. As wikipedia explains: This 2003 film is "a word-for-word basis from the American Bible Society's Good News Bible. This three-hour epic feature film follows John's Gospel precisely, without additions to the story from other Gospels, nor omission of complex passages."

Wiki goes on to say: "This film was created by a constituency of artists from Canada and the United Kingdom, along with academic and theological consultants from around the world. The cast was selected primarily from the Stratford Shakespeare Festival and Soulpepper Theatre Company, as well as Britain's Royal Shakespeare Company and Royal National Theatre. The musical score, composed by Jeff Danna and created for the film, is partially based on the music of the Biblical period."

With an outstanding cast, and quality production values, this film is well worth seeing.

Around eight people showed up for our home showing of "The Gospel of John." Among those present was my friend Joseph Prabhu, a professor of religion and philosophy who used to be an acolyte for Mother Teresa and a student of Ramon Panikkar, the great Catholic theologian; and Betsy Perry of All Saints. Neighbors and friends of Jill also showed up, making it a very diverse and interesting crowd.

It was powerful and fascinating to watch the 2-hour version of John's Gospel (the complete one is 3 hours long). As someone trained in literary criticism, I was fascinated by the narrative as a dramatic whole. In Jesus' time, people with dramatic gifts for storytelling would have memorized the entire story and told it to an audience in one sitting--just as we would go to a movie. (It is probably not accidental that each of the Gospels is about the length of a feature film or a play.)

I wonder if any theologian/scholar has approached reading/interpreting each Gospel as a self-contained dramatic narrative. Bill Lesher, a distinguished professor and scholar, told me that a scholar he knew had memorized the Gospel of John and recites it to his students. What a powerful experience that must be!

What leaped out at me watching and listening to the Gospel of John was the focus on the word "authority," which was used repeatedly for dramatic effect. Who has authority? Who has real power?

The Sanhedrin claimed to have authority because of its reliance on Scripture, the Torah of Moses, but Jesus blows that claim out of the water by saying that unless you have a direct connection with the Father, or at least believe in the one that the Father sent, you can't really understand Mosaic law. Pilate also claims to have authority and power, but Jesus makes it clear that Pilate's power comes from "above." Then there's the strange moment when Jesus gives Judas the bread soaked in sauce and "the devil enters him" and Jesus tells him to "do what he must do." Even there, it is clear that Jesus/God is in charge: Judas/the devil cannot betray Jesus without permission from God/Jesus, who has the ultimate power and authority.

(Quakers were drawn to the Gospel of John because he insisted that we need this direct relationship with God and the Inward Light of Christ and the Holy Spirit in order to understand Scripture and live a faithful life.)

The Sanhedrin's claim to authority is revealed to be hollow when they tell Pilate: "We have no king but the Emperor." At that moment, Jesus' claim to real authority is vindicated. The Jewish "powers-that-be" are in cahoots with Rome. Jesus is the true liberator, the Messiah, the Son of God.

 I was also struck by the irony in the final scenes. Caiaphas cynically tells the Sanhedrin "It is expedient that one man die for the good of the nation," not realizing that Jesus' death is in fact part of God's plan to save not only Israel, but the whole world. Similarly, Pilate is not aware of what he is really doing or saying when he cynically writes "King of the Jews" on the cross of Jesus. Pilate is doing this to irritate the leaders of the Jews, whom he has come to despise, but in so doing, Pilate has uttered a profound truth he is too worldly to understand. Jesus really is king not only of the Jews, but of the world.

The other device I noticed was how Jesus baits his opponents, saying outrageous things that force people to make a choice and reveal their true nature. In so doing, he unmasks the structural violence inherent in domination system, as well as how hard it is to break free of that system.

His baiting of the religious leaders reminds me of a Zen story about a samurai who went to a Zen master to ask if Buddhists believe in heaven and hell.

 The Zen master replied. "What a stupid question! I can't give you an answer because you wouldn't understand."

 The samurai became infuriated and lifted his sword to kill the Zen master.

 "Ah," said the Zen master. "Now you are in hell."

 The samurai paused to think about this strange response.

"Ah," said the Zen master. "Now you are in heaven."

Fortunately for the Zen master, the Zen master "got it," laid down his sword and became a disciple.

Jesus was not so fortunate. The powers-that-be didn't lay down their swords, but by killing Jesus, they revealed that they were indeed in league with the devil, that is, with the Roman authorities, and out of touch with God.

The last scene in which Jesus interacts with Peter is also a literary masterpiece. The way in which Jesus reveals that he has forgiven Peter for betraying him three times is brilliant. And the emphasis on "feeding my sheep" is a beautiful way of re-framing the Great Commission: to be lovers/followers of Christ, we must nourish people physically, spiritually and emotionally. What a beautiful way to end this Gospel!

(Speaking of "feeding sheep," Jill makes yummy cookies and other goodies for our gathering!)

The Subversive Wisdom of John

For the past couple of weeks we have held meetings in our home to discuss the "subversive wisdom" of John's Gospel. Homeland security, take note!

The leader of this study has been Bert Newton, a Mennonite community advocate and organizer of the Palm Sunday Peace Parade (where Jill and I met). Bert has just published a book with the provocative title: Subversive Wisdom: Sociopolitical Dimensions of John's Gospel, which has received accolades from two people I deeply respect. Ched Myers, the author of Building the Strong Man: A Political Rading of Mark's Story of Jesus, writes:

"This study of John's story of Jesus exhibits remarkable brevity and depth, passion and thoughtfulness. The often perplexing Fourth Gospel comes alive, both in its context and ours."

Jill Shook (my wife) writes enthusiastically:

"Subversive Wisdom provides a deeply biblical rationale for hope and courage to live Jesus' radical message, even when it seems all hope is lost. I recommend that every pastor and leader not only read this book but also teach it and allow it to transform their understanding of John's Gospel."

For the past couple of weeks, the Gospel of John has come alive in our home. We began by showing the film "The Gospel of John," narrated by Christopher Plummer--a powerful, word-by-word dramatization of this story. Around a dozen people attended. I'll say more about my response to this film in another post.

Bert began the first session of our study of John’s gospel by inviting us to role play.

“Who would like to meet the Jesus of John’s gospel?”

When a woman volunteered, Bert shook her hand and asked, “What’s your name?”

“Cathy.”

“Well, I am the light of the world,” responded Bert. “No one comes to the Father except through me. I’m telling you the truth. If you don’t believe in me, your Father is the devil.”

Then he asked, “How did my words make you feel?”

“Awful,” Cathy replied. “I felt manipulated.”

Bert went on to say that many pious readers of John’s Gospel don’t ask themselves why Jesus speaks in such a bold and seemingly offensive way. This isn’t how Jesus talks in the synoptic Gospels. In these Gospels Jesus is usually self-effacing about his role as the Messiah. He speaks in parables that refer to the Kingdom of God, not so much about himself.

Bert’s explanation for the boldness of John’s Jesus is fascinating and compelling: Jesus is “impersonating” Lady Wisdom of Proverbs who also speaks boldly, proclaiming herself to be the source of all that is true and good. Like Lady Wisdom, Jesus cries out on the street and claims that he offers the bread and wine of true life.

As we explored the parallels between the words of Jesus in John and Lady Wisdom in Proverbs, it became clear that the authors of John were drawing this comparison for important political as well as theological reasons.

“John’s Gospel turns the traditional patriarchal male stereotypes upside down,” said Bert.

Jesus validates the woman who washes his feet with her hair and with fine perfume. He not only lifts her up as an example to follow, he himself washes the feet of his disciples to remind them that his followers must be like her—humble and lovingly devoted to others. This is a far cry from the role that male leaders traditionally assume.

(Footwashing was also practiced as a form of hospitality among Jews. According to a Jewish wesbite, "The ritual washing of hands and feet has been an important Jewish symbol for generations. In Genesis, Abraham washed the feet of the three angels who visited him at his tent both as an act of welcome and as a token of his esteem." The Bible says that Abraham ordered water to be brought for footwashing, not that he did it himself. But the tradition is one that Jesus no doubt knew and was following.)

As we explored the text more deeply, it became clear that Jesus was affirming the aspects of God we traditionally associate with females and servants. He not only washes his disciples’ feet, he also feeds them breakfast when he makes his last appearance on the shores of the sea of Galilee. This is very different from the dramatic ascension to heaven in other Gospels. In John’s Gospel, Jesus’ final message isn’t “proclaim my Gospel” but “feed my sheep.”

Bert’s reading of John opened up new perspectives for us and helped us to see the Jesus of John’s Gospel in a new light.

This week we explored the concept of the “Son of God” in relation to Old Testament teachings as well as the claims of the Roman empire. More will be said about this session in my next posting.