Monday, December 05, 2011
Monday, October 04, 2010
Utopia as an Appeal to Dialogue
“Their willingness to learn, I think, is the really important reason for their being better gov-erned and living more happily than we do, though we are not inferior to them in brains or re-sources” (More 545). This statement in the sixteenth century book Utopia points to an interesting message embedded within the text. From the beginning of the book, the plot is really about the discussion of the ideas behind the Utopian way of life more than Utopia itself. Though the element of discovering the land of “Utopia” is there, Utopia as a whole is more about learning to open your mind to dreaming up new possibilities and discussing them with others. In the article “A Definition of Utopia,” this idea is expanded upon, “Utopia represents in fact one of the no-blest aspirations of man. What could be of more significance in the history of civilization than that man, since he first began to think and write, has continued ever to dream of a better world and, to speculate as to its possible nature, and to communicate his longings to other men in the hope that the ideal might, at least in part, become reality?” (Negley and Patrick 108). Utopia il-lustrates more than an attempt to expose flaws within society, it is an open invitation for dialogue between opposing viewpoints in order that they may learn from each other and help to create a better world.
Utopia does not operate under the illusion that such discussions between traditionally opposing sides will result in total agreement, nor that they will always be amicable. Rather, it stresses the point that despite the inevitability of conflict, differing perspectives should continue to strive to work together for the possibility of greater good. This is demonstrated when Hythloday’s consistent arguing against being able to share his knowledge is ironically refuted in his obvious desire to do so (He left the island of Utopia for the express reason of sharing his newfound ideas with others). More’s attempt to persuade Hythloday to speak his own thoughts and ideas, while not always agreeing with them, also indicates the meaning behind the dialogue within the story. In fact, the extent to which More reserves space within the book specifically for dialogue be-tween characters is evidence of its importance. The more they talk with each other, argue, and discuss one another’s thoughts, the more the book progresses and is able to point out the good and bad within each point of view.
The dialogue within Utopia presents multiple points of view on the world and how life should be lived. The book does not end with a conclusion as to what the “best” ideas are or even with a final winner in the discussion between More, Hythloday and Giles. That would be to miss the point. Instead, it illustrates a method of discussion, in order to attempt to answer some of the deep questions in the world. Though many people have tried to analyze Utopia and fit it into categories of political significance, the dialogue points to alternative meanings within the book. This message of conversation between people is central to the storyline and deserves attention with every reading. This view on Utopia may not seems as exciting as a more literal interpreta-tion of More’s outlook on life, however it seems to cut right to the heart of the story.
There is no question that portions, at least, of the descriptions of the fictional land of Utopia are absurd and impractical in reality. In fact More touches on this in his final letter to Peter Giles, “Aren’t there any absurdities elsewhere in the world? And haven’t most of the philosophers who’ve written about society, a ruler, or even the office of private citizen, managed to say some-thing that needs correcting?” (589). He is again reiterating that the point is not that Utopia offers foolproof solutions, but that it offers an opportunity for discussion. Near the end of the story, the character of Thomas More admits that he is not entirely convinced of the utopian ideal of life and that he still considers some of the ideas put forth to be questionable (588). Here, even within the story, More indicates the acceptance of alternate positions while staying true to his own beliefs (whether they portray the character of Thomas More or the More in reality).
The concept of dialogue between people is itself also debated within the storyline; is it profitable to do so or not? Hythloday argues that often it is not, “If a man should suggest something he had read of in other places or seen in far places, the other counselors would think their reputation for wisdom was endangered, and they would look like simpletons, unless they could find fault with his proposal” (528). He goes on to say that he will not speak to those who are secure in their opposition of his ideas by telling a story of a previous encounter with the archbishop of Canterbury (529). In this story, Hythloday presents his ideas on the punishment of thieves and is somewhat made fun of by those included in the conversation. However, when some of his ideas are taken seriously by the archbishop, the others suddenly praise the ideas presented because they come from someone respected, rather than from Hythloday. Hythloday uses this encounter to prove that attempting to sway the minds of those who are against you is a futile pursuit. It is, however, clear that he does not take this position to the extreme, because he appears content to argue his case with More, who does not necessarily agree with all of his ideas.
The character of Thomas More assumes the opposite view; affirming the concept of speaking to those you might influence, even if they are against you, “Yet I think if you would devote your time and energy to public affairs, you would do a thing worthy of a generous and philosophical nature, even if you did not much like it” (528). He understands that not everyone will be con-vinced, but tries to persuade Hythloday that he can still be of use to the world if he will only openly share his ideas. There is a bit of a tug-of-war between perspectives, with opponents occa-sionally switching sides as they come to see the other’s point of view. This statement of More’s illustrates the tug-of-war, “To tell you the truth, I don’t think you should offer advice or thrust on people ideas of this sort that you know will not be listened to. What good will it do?” (541). The two of them, with occasional input from Giles, continue back and forth for some time, each pre-senting their own case.
Eventually, a middle ground is somewhat discussed and emphasized, one that addresses the appropriate time, place and tone for which such discussions between parties must take place in order to be productive. More’s character is the one who proposes this middle ground, and though Hythloday remains somewhat unconvinced, the argument hangs in the air as an interesting proposition, “And don’t arrogantly force strange ideas on people who you know have set their minds on a different course from yours...Handle the situation tactfully, and thus what you cannot turn into good, you may at least make as little bad as possible. For it is impossible to make eve-rything good unless you make all men good...” (542). Soon after this, Hythloday is convinced enough of the other men’s desire to learn of his knowledge and experience that he begins to tell of the Utopians and their world.
There has been some question as to whether or not the dialogue within Utopia is meant as a serious discussion or rather a more lighthearted view of several different perspectives. C.S. Lewis eloquently argues that, “it appears confused only so long as we are trying to get out of it what it never intended to give. It becomes intelligible and delightful as soon as we take it for what it is—a holiday work, a spontaneous overflow of intellectual high spirits, a revel of debate, paradox, comedy and (above all) of invention, which starts many hares and kills none” (68). This again points out the idea that Utopia is not a book intended to answer questions, but to raise them and request their discussion. The story of Utopia with its creativity and debate offers a unique look into the concept of discourse between those of opposite convictions. It invites people to-gether in the hope that they can learn to dream from each other.
Works Cited
Lewis, C.S. “A Play of Wit.” Twentieth Century Interpretations of Utopia. William Nelson. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc, 1968. 66-69.
More, Sir Thomas. “Utopia.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Stephan Greenblatt. New York: W.W. Norton & Company Inc, 2006. 521-590.
Negley, G.R. and J. Max Patrick. “A Definition of Utopia.” Twentieth Century Interpretations of Utopia. William Nelson. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc, 1968. 108-109.
Utopia does not operate under the illusion that such discussions between traditionally opposing sides will result in total agreement, nor that they will always be amicable. Rather, it stresses the point that despite the inevitability of conflict, differing perspectives should continue to strive to work together for the possibility of greater good. This is demonstrated when Hythloday’s consistent arguing against being able to share his knowledge is ironically refuted in his obvious desire to do so (He left the island of Utopia for the express reason of sharing his newfound ideas with others). More’s attempt to persuade Hythloday to speak his own thoughts and ideas, while not always agreeing with them, also indicates the meaning behind the dialogue within the story. In fact, the extent to which More reserves space within the book specifically for dialogue be-tween characters is evidence of its importance. The more they talk with each other, argue, and discuss one another’s thoughts, the more the book progresses and is able to point out the good and bad within each point of view.
The dialogue within Utopia presents multiple points of view on the world and how life should be lived. The book does not end with a conclusion as to what the “best” ideas are or even with a final winner in the discussion between More, Hythloday and Giles. That would be to miss the point. Instead, it illustrates a method of discussion, in order to attempt to answer some of the deep questions in the world. Though many people have tried to analyze Utopia and fit it into categories of political significance, the dialogue points to alternative meanings within the book. This message of conversation between people is central to the storyline and deserves attention with every reading. This view on Utopia may not seems as exciting as a more literal interpreta-tion of More’s outlook on life, however it seems to cut right to the heart of the story.
There is no question that portions, at least, of the descriptions of the fictional land of Utopia are absurd and impractical in reality. In fact More touches on this in his final letter to Peter Giles, “Aren’t there any absurdities elsewhere in the world? And haven’t most of the philosophers who’ve written about society, a ruler, or even the office of private citizen, managed to say some-thing that needs correcting?” (589). He is again reiterating that the point is not that Utopia offers foolproof solutions, but that it offers an opportunity for discussion. Near the end of the story, the character of Thomas More admits that he is not entirely convinced of the utopian ideal of life and that he still considers some of the ideas put forth to be questionable (588). Here, even within the story, More indicates the acceptance of alternate positions while staying true to his own beliefs (whether they portray the character of Thomas More or the More in reality).
The concept of dialogue between people is itself also debated within the storyline; is it profitable to do so or not? Hythloday argues that often it is not, “If a man should suggest something he had read of in other places or seen in far places, the other counselors would think their reputation for wisdom was endangered, and they would look like simpletons, unless they could find fault with his proposal” (528). He goes on to say that he will not speak to those who are secure in their opposition of his ideas by telling a story of a previous encounter with the archbishop of Canterbury (529). In this story, Hythloday presents his ideas on the punishment of thieves and is somewhat made fun of by those included in the conversation. However, when some of his ideas are taken seriously by the archbishop, the others suddenly praise the ideas presented because they come from someone respected, rather than from Hythloday. Hythloday uses this encounter to prove that attempting to sway the minds of those who are against you is a futile pursuit. It is, however, clear that he does not take this position to the extreme, because he appears content to argue his case with More, who does not necessarily agree with all of his ideas.
The character of Thomas More assumes the opposite view; affirming the concept of speaking to those you might influence, even if they are against you, “Yet I think if you would devote your time and energy to public affairs, you would do a thing worthy of a generous and philosophical nature, even if you did not much like it” (528). He understands that not everyone will be con-vinced, but tries to persuade Hythloday that he can still be of use to the world if he will only openly share his ideas. There is a bit of a tug-of-war between perspectives, with opponents occa-sionally switching sides as they come to see the other’s point of view. This statement of More’s illustrates the tug-of-war, “To tell you the truth, I don’t think you should offer advice or thrust on people ideas of this sort that you know will not be listened to. What good will it do?” (541). The two of them, with occasional input from Giles, continue back and forth for some time, each pre-senting their own case.
Eventually, a middle ground is somewhat discussed and emphasized, one that addresses the appropriate time, place and tone for which such discussions between parties must take place in order to be productive. More’s character is the one who proposes this middle ground, and though Hythloday remains somewhat unconvinced, the argument hangs in the air as an interesting proposition, “And don’t arrogantly force strange ideas on people who you know have set their minds on a different course from yours...Handle the situation tactfully, and thus what you cannot turn into good, you may at least make as little bad as possible. For it is impossible to make eve-rything good unless you make all men good...” (542). Soon after this, Hythloday is convinced enough of the other men’s desire to learn of his knowledge and experience that he begins to tell of the Utopians and their world.
There has been some question as to whether or not the dialogue within Utopia is meant as a serious discussion or rather a more lighthearted view of several different perspectives. C.S. Lewis eloquently argues that, “it appears confused only so long as we are trying to get out of it what it never intended to give. It becomes intelligible and delightful as soon as we take it for what it is—a holiday work, a spontaneous overflow of intellectual high spirits, a revel of debate, paradox, comedy and (above all) of invention, which starts many hares and kills none” (68). This again points out the idea that Utopia is not a book intended to answer questions, but to raise them and request their discussion. The story of Utopia with its creativity and debate offers a unique look into the concept of discourse between those of opposite convictions. It invites people to-gether in the hope that they can learn to dream from each other.
Works Cited
Lewis, C.S. “A Play of Wit.” Twentieth Century Interpretations of Utopia. William Nelson. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc, 1968. 66-69.
More, Sir Thomas. “Utopia.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Stephan Greenblatt. New York: W.W. Norton & Company Inc, 2006. 521-590.
Negley, G.R. and J. Max Patrick. “A Definition of Utopia.” Twentieth Century Interpretations of Utopia. William Nelson. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc, 1968. 108-109.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Redefining Heroism
Beowulf is the oldest English epic of its kind and has been read and studied by many generations as a great work of English literature. Written during the Middle Ages, it portrays the life of the hero, Beowulf, and his conquests, glory, and ultimate death. These lines come from this epic poem and describe the meaning behind the poem perfectly:
And now, although he wanted this challenge to be one he’d face
By himself alone – the shepherd of our land
A man unequaled in the quest for glory
And a name for daring – now the day has come
When this lord we serve needs sound men
To give him their support (“Beowulf” lines 2642-2648).
Many have looked upon this poem and seen only blood and gore, however this is not the actual heart of the story of Beowulf. To view the story this way is to overlook the crescendo of the poem, as if it is only an after thought or epilogue to the excitement of Beowulf’s earlier battles. The culmination of Beowulf’s life is one of the most beautiful pieces of the poem because it overthrows all previous notions of heroism within the poem and replaces them with a picture of community. A new ideal of a hero then is established: one who is both willing to give and receive assistance in times of trouble.
The tale begins with Beowulf coming to rescue the Danes from a horrible monster that is terrorizing their land. From the very start Beowulf is unafraid and confident in his ability to slay this monster named Grendel. He is the stereotypical embodiment of “heroism,” and he knows it. Unashamed and secure in his strength and skill, he claims to the king of the Danes that he can do what no man has dared do before: face the monster. His brave offer is accepted and he waits for the beast to attack. When Grendel finally shows his hand and Beowulf is able to disarm him (quite literally), the Danes hail Beowulf as a true hero, surpassing all others. Their joy is short lived however, before Grendel’s mother comes on the scene. Avenging her son, she attacks the people and makes off with a great warrior. This unexpected blow to the community leaves them surprised and in pain. They again turn to Beowulf for help, believing him to be the only one capable of bringing down yet another monster.
Beowulf accepts the worship of the people because he believes it is well deserved, and he knows that without him they would not be rid of Grendel. He begins to believe himself (even more than before) to be a uniquely great warrior: godlike. Perhaps he is right in thinking these things, perhaps not. Regardless, he begins to expect the same sort of exceptional heroism and bravery from others. Even in the face of grief he loses sympathy for those with less drive, not understanding that there is strength in the “weakness” of acknowledging love for another. After the death of a close friend Beowulf says to Hrothgar, “Wise sir, do not grieve. It is always better/ to avenge dear ones than to indulge in mourning/Endure your troubles…Bear up/ and be the man I expect you to be.”(lines 1384 and 1395-1396). He forgets for a while that all humanity is bound together and that no man stands alone in his glory.
After this, Beowulf hunts down Grendel’s mother, and he is again successful in his valiant efforts. He leaves the Danes a successful and “better off” man, for now he has won both fame and renown in the world. But throughout the entire story the universe seems to cry out to him to look at how he got to be where he is and to remind him that none of his actions were performed alone. Robert Creed, an expert in Old English literature and comparative oral traditions, says this in The Remaking of Beowulf, “So the poet retold the old tale and rehabilitated the old god by turning him into a hero…In turning him into a hero, the poet was able to preserve very important things from the deep past, things that spoke about the identity of the folk and reminded them of their old ways”(144-145). The poet tries to push Beowulf to the point of seeing himself as human and redefining heroism by himself, but he simply does not understand. The poet speaks to Beowulf saying:
O flower of warriors, beware of that trap
Choose, dear Beowulf, the better part
Eternal rewards. Do not give way to pride
For a brief while your strength is in bloom
But it fades quickly (lines 1758-1762).
From the very beginning, the point is that one man alone is nothing for long. He will always, whether as a young man or in old age, need the support and friendship of another. Beowulf’s quest for glory, admirable as it is, forgets to call upon this aspect of human nature, and his heroism can only be seen as incomplete because he lives in it alone.
Sadly, his focus only on himself later causes unnecessary danger to himself and his fellow fighters, “Often when one man follows his own will /Many are hurt. This happened to us” (lines 3077-3078). Beowulf chooses to go forward in what he believes to be his destiny, even though he is putting others in harms way. There is no hatred expressed towards Beowulf for this, simply sadness that he missed the point. If only he had allowed others to help him from the beginning, he might not have died. His actions as a young man, independent and somewhat careless, set him up to feel unable to ask for help when he needed it most.
Fortunately, this is not the end of the poem. Beowulf does die, but not before seeing community in action. A young man called Wiglaf sees the distress of his king and his unwillingness (or inability) to ask for help and responds. He goes to the aid of his king. This is the climax of the story. It expresses true heroism: to see a need and meet it, even if the one in need is convinced that they can make it on their own. And in the face of danger, to fly to the rescue of someone else for the sake of love:
But within one heart
Sorrow welled up: in a man of worth
The claims of kinship cannot be denied
He could not hold back: One hand brandished
The yellow-timbered shield, the other drew his sword (lines 2599-2601 and 2609-2610).
Wiglaf expresses disbelief that anyone would leave Beowulf to his fate, remembering the good things he has done in his life, even if the motive behind them was not always honorable:
That is unthinkable, unless we have first
Slain the foe and defended the life
Of the prince of the Weather-Geats. I well know
The things he has done for us deserve better (lines 2654-2657).
Wiglaf runs to Beowulf and helps him fight his last battle. Beowulf’s life might have ended in shame at being unable to destroy his final enemy. Instead, he chooses to surrender to Wiglaf’s assistance, redefining the concept of heroism within the poem completely. Instead of the lone warrior who saves the day, two are necessary to defeat the final foe. This beautiful culmination of the story proves the importance of being able to both give and receive aid. Heroism cannot be defined as something one can attain alone through brave exploits, but rather, despite previous achievements, it is in taking the hand of another. The poem ends with Beowulf’s death, but with a new perspective of what it means to live as a hero.
This new idea cannot help but affect the way Beowulf is read and interpreted today. No longer is it simply a story about the meaning of “heroism” in the Middle Ages, but a cause to reconsider the modern concepts of independence and friendship and how they should interact. Beowulf, when really understood, can alter worldviews. Cleanth Brooks, author of Modern Poetry and Tradition, states the connection between ancient texts and perception of the world in this way, “If the student knows how to read a poem or a novel…He will be able to understand not only himself as a man of the modern period, but also the present state of the civilization that has nurtured him”(187). To look at Beowulf and apply it to life today would be to acquiesce to its suggestion that community and friendship are more important than glory. Wiglafs words finally sum up the meaning of this great epic, “Should he alone be left exposed/ To fall in battle? We must bond together/ Shield and helmet, mail-shirt and sword”(Lines 2658-2660). Thus ends the story of Beowulf, a classic epic that continues to redefine the concept of heroism today.
Works Cited
“Beowulf.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt et al. 8th Edition. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006. 34-100. Print.
Brooks, Cleanth. Community Religion and Literature. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1995. Print.
Creed, Robert P. “The Remaking of Beowulf.” Oral Tradition In Literature. Ed. John M. Foley. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1986. 136- 146. Print.
And now, although he wanted this challenge to be one he’d face
By himself alone – the shepherd of our land
A man unequaled in the quest for glory
And a name for daring – now the day has come
When this lord we serve needs sound men
To give him their support (“Beowulf” lines 2642-2648).
Many have looked upon this poem and seen only blood and gore, however this is not the actual heart of the story of Beowulf. To view the story this way is to overlook the crescendo of the poem, as if it is only an after thought or epilogue to the excitement of Beowulf’s earlier battles. The culmination of Beowulf’s life is one of the most beautiful pieces of the poem because it overthrows all previous notions of heroism within the poem and replaces them with a picture of community. A new ideal of a hero then is established: one who is both willing to give and receive assistance in times of trouble.
The tale begins with Beowulf coming to rescue the Danes from a horrible monster that is terrorizing their land. From the very start Beowulf is unafraid and confident in his ability to slay this monster named Grendel. He is the stereotypical embodiment of “heroism,” and he knows it. Unashamed and secure in his strength and skill, he claims to the king of the Danes that he can do what no man has dared do before: face the monster. His brave offer is accepted and he waits for the beast to attack. When Grendel finally shows his hand and Beowulf is able to disarm him (quite literally), the Danes hail Beowulf as a true hero, surpassing all others. Their joy is short lived however, before Grendel’s mother comes on the scene. Avenging her son, she attacks the people and makes off with a great warrior. This unexpected blow to the community leaves them surprised and in pain. They again turn to Beowulf for help, believing him to be the only one capable of bringing down yet another monster.
Beowulf accepts the worship of the people because he believes it is well deserved, and he knows that without him they would not be rid of Grendel. He begins to believe himself (even more than before) to be a uniquely great warrior: godlike. Perhaps he is right in thinking these things, perhaps not. Regardless, he begins to expect the same sort of exceptional heroism and bravery from others. Even in the face of grief he loses sympathy for those with less drive, not understanding that there is strength in the “weakness” of acknowledging love for another. After the death of a close friend Beowulf says to Hrothgar, “Wise sir, do not grieve. It is always better/ to avenge dear ones than to indulge in mourning/Endure your troubles…Bear up/ and be the man I expect you to be.”(lines 1384 and 1395-1396). He forgets for a while that all humanity is bound together and that no man stands alone in his glory.
After this, Beowulf hunts down Grendel’s mother, and he is again successful in his valiant efforts. He leaves the Danes a successful and “better off” man, for now he has won both fame and renown in the world. But throughout the entire story the universe seems to cry out to him to look at how he got to be where he is and to remind him that none of his actions were performed alone. Robert Creed, an expert in Old English literature and comparative oral traditions, says this in The Remaking of Beowulf, “So the poet retold the old tale and rehabilitated the old god by turning him into a hero…In turning him into a hero, the poet was able to preserve very important things from the deep past, things that spoke about the identity of the folk and reminded them of their old ways”(144-145). The poet tries to push Beowulf to the point of seeing himself as human and redefining heroism by himself, but he simply does not understand. The poet speaks to Beowulf saying:
O flower of warriors, beware of that trap
Choose, dear Beowulf, the better part
Eternal rewards. Do not give way to pride
For a brief while your strength is in bloom
But it fades quickly (lines 1758-1762).
From the very beginning, the point is that one man alone is nothing for long. He will always, whether as a young man or in old age, need the support and friendship of another. Beowulf’s quest for glory, admirable as it is, forgets to call upon this aspect of human nature, and his heroism can only be seen as incomplete because he lives in it alone.
Sadly, his focus only on himself later causes unnecessary danger to himself and his fellow fighters, “Often when one man follows his own will /Many are hurt. This happened to us” (lines 3077-3078). Beowulf chooses to go forward in what he believes to be his destiny, even though he is putting others in harms way. There is no hatred expressed towards Beowulf for this, simply sadness that he missed the point. If only he had allowed others to help him from the beginning, he might not have died. His actions as a young man, independent and somewhat careless, set him up to feel unable to ask for help when he needed it most.
Fortunately, this is not the end of the poem. Beowulf does die, but not before seeing community in action. A young man called Wiglaf sees the distress of his king and his unwillingness (or inability) to ask for help and responds. He goes to the aid of his king. This is the climax of the story. It expresses true heroism: to see a need and meet it, even if the one in need is convinced that they can make it on their own. And in the face of danger, to fly to the rescue of someone else for the sake of love:
But within one heart
Sorrow welled up: in a man of worth
The claims of kinship cannot be denied
He could not hold back: One hand brandished
The yellow-timbered shield, the other drew his sword (lines 2599-2601 and 2609-2610).
Wiglaf expresses disbelief that anyone would leave Beowulf to his fate, remembering the good things he has done in his life, even if the motive behind them was not always honorable:
That is unthinkable, unless we have first
Slain the foe and defended the life
Of the prince of the Weather-Geats. I well know
The things he has done for us deserve better (lines 2654-2657).
Wiglaf runs to Beowulf and helps him fight his last battle. Beowulf’s life might have ended in shame at being unable to destroy his final enemy. Instead, he chooses to surrender to Wiglaf’s assistance, redefining the concept of heroism within the poem completely. Instead of the lone warrior who saves the day, two are necessary to defeat the final foe. This beautiful culmination of the story proves the importance of being able to both give and receive aid. Heroism cannot be defined as something one can attain alone through brave exploits, but rather, despite previous achievements, it is in taking the hand of another. The poem ends with Beowulf’s death, but with a new perspective of what it means to live as a hero.
This new idea cannot help but affect the way Beowulf is read and interpreted today. No longer is it simply a story about the meaning of “heroism” in the Middle Ages, but a cause to reconsider the modern concepts of independence and friendship and how they should interact. Beowulf, when really understood, can alter worldviews. Cleanth Brooks, author of Modern Poetry and Tradition, states the connection between ancient texts and perception of the world in this way, “If the student knows how to read a poem or a novel…He will be able to understand not only himself as a man of the modern period, but also the present state of the civilization that has nurtured him”(187). To look at Beowulf and apply it to life today would be to acquiesce to its suggestion that community and friendship are more important than glory. Wiglafs words finally sum up the meaning of this great epic, “Should he alone be left exposed/ To fall in battle? We must bond together/ Shield and helmet, mail-shirt and sword”(Lines 2658-2660). Thus ends the story of Beowulf, a classic epic that continues to redefine the concept of heroism today.
Works Cited
“Beowulf.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt et al. 8th Edition. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006. 34-100. Print.
Brooks, Cleanth. Community Religion and Literature. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1995. Print.
Creed, Robert P. “The Remaking of Beowulf.” Oral Tradition In Literature. Ed. John M. Foley. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1986. 136- 146. Print.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
We Have What It Takes
Clare Boothe Luce once said, “Because I am a woman, I must make unusual efforts to succeed. If I fail, no one will say, ‘She doesn’t have what it takes.’ They will say, ‘Women don’t have what it takes’” (qtd. in The Quote Garden). There is no question that today women have what it takes. Today, women play key roles in many political initiatives around the world, and they continue to bring to light many important issues that without their attention may go unnoticed. No longer is the world questioning whether or not women can be beneficial or influential in the political world. It knows for a fact that they can. The political realm has recently taken great strides to establish the importance of women activists and politicians in the world, and these women have never been needed more than now. Many important issues are surfacing in the international community regarding women’s rights and these topics, though of interest and extreme importance to men, benefit greatly from female leadership and direction. One such issue is that of Female Circumcision or Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).
The issue of Female Genital Mutilation has only recently been addressed in the political realm, despite the fact that this disturbing practice has been used as a traditional rite-of-passage ceremony in Africa for centuries. FGM is the practice of removing and in some cases completely closing off a young girl’s genitals. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that somewhere between 100 and 140 million girls have undergone some form of Female Genital Mutilation (7). They also estimate that each year another 2 million girls are at the risk of FGM (9). In all of its forms, Female Genital Mutilation is incredibly damaging to the individual for many reasons and has been deemed by the United Nations to be a violation of human rights.
The article Female Genital Mutilation divides the practice of FGM into four types. This is what normal female anatomy looks like:
It states that in type one FGM (called a clitoridectomy), a part of or the entire clitoris is removed and the wound is sewn up. Type one looks like this:
In type two (called an excision), the entire clitoris is removed and part or all of the labia minora also. Often rough stitches or crude balms are applied to the wound, often resulting in infection. Type two looks like this:
Type three (commonly known as infibulation) is the most serious form of FGM and involves removal of the clitoris, labia minora, and parts of the labia majora. The vaginal opening and urethra are then sewn over leaving only a small opening through which urine and menstrual flow escape. This is type three:
Type four involves piercing or pricking of the genitals, the introduction of damaging or painful substances into the vagina and in some cases cauterization of the clitoris (or remaining wound) (Committee on Bioethics 153). All forms of FGM are extremely painful and have damaging long-term effects.
Female Genital Mutilation has been shown to cause serious physical and psychological damage to those who have been circumcised. The article, Female Genital Mutilation: An Injury, Physical and Mental Harm, reveals that some of the more serious health problems caused by FGM include infection, urine retention (because of pain), infertility, higher risk for HIV due to unclean surgical instruments or unclean environments, and painful, or in some cases the impossibility of, intercourse. The article also revealed that some of the common psychological effects of FGM include post-traumatic stress disorder, loss of memory, severe nightmares, chronic irritability, severe depression and a high risk for psychosomatic diseases (Utz-Billing and Kentenich 227). All of these are examples of the common effects of Female Genital Mutilation and are some of the main reasons for political as well as social action against this practice, no matter the good intentions behind it.
The most common reason FGM is practiced is for rite-of-passage purposes. It is seen as a way of maintaining a “calm” or “controlled” sexuality. It culturally prepares a girl for marriage and supposedly helps to “save” her for her wedding night. The age at which FGM is preformed on a girl varies by region and culture. The WHO states that it can be preformed on girls from the time of birth to the time of a woman’s first pregnancy (10). The most common age, however, according to authors Anika Rahman and Nahid Toubia, is between the ages of four and twelve (3). The thought behind the practice is that FGM is a way to keep a woman’s “honor” in tact. It is not linked to a specific religion, but rather to traditional tribal coming–of-age practices. However, despite good intentions, the consequences experienced by those with FGM have led many international activists to believe that there is a better way to provide a girl with a coming-of-age ceremony without removing her sexuality altogether and yet maintaining a sense of honor in African cultures.
These activists are mostly women who, either through personal experience or through years of research and study, are incredibly educated regarding FGM and desire to protect both current and future generations from the negative effects of this practice. Mary Robinson, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and one such political activist, further explains, “Female genital mutilation affects the physical integrity of women and children and as such should be condemned. In doing so, it is necessary to act with tact and patience, bringing communities to understand that their cultural values are not to be confused with cultural practices, and that those practices can be changed without adversely affecting values” (qtd. in Rahman and Toubia 1). Many of these women have joined to form groups and organizations in various countries around the world to fight Female Genital Mutilation. It is the hope that through these women’s lives, other women will be encouraged to stand up against similar violations of women’s rights around the world.
Some of these groups of women include NOW (located in Nigeria) and New Woman (located in Egypt). Frances Althaus, a senior editor for International Family Planning Perspectives, comments on the effects of these organizations, “in part because these groups brought fresh perspective to the issue, the emphasis in discussions of female circumcision shifted to encompass women’s human and reproductive rights as well as their health” (130). Althaus goes on to explain that with these new perspectives stronger approaches to the topic of FGM have occurred. According to her, the International Conference on Population and Development used the term “Female Genital Mutilation” for the first time instead of “Female Circumcision” in the Programme of Action in Cairo 1994. She states that, “the Programme refers to female genital mutilation as a ‘basic rights violation’ and urges governments to ‘prohibit and urgently stop the practice…wherever it exists’” (130). These women are already changing perspectives around the world regarding a practice to which, until recently, the world has turned a blind eye.
The WHO claims that in the past the topic of FGM has been deemed “an issue of such extreme sensitivity” as to prevent any real action from taking place (5). Slowly but surely this view has changed and others are realizing the great amount of danger in which these young girls are placed because the international community has placed this violation of rights on the back burner. The article Female Genital Mutilation: A Physical and Mental Harm cites several international organizations such as the World Health Organization, the World Medical Association and UNICEF who have condemned the practice of FGM and who have created projects to combat its continuation (Utz-Billing and Kentenich 228). Central to all of these projects is the valuing of women and children and the desire to protect their rights. In fact, it is so important that women be involved in ending this practice that the WHO has stressed the need to involve both women activists and women directly affected by FGM in their efforts. They state, “Using… women affected by FGM is an effective strategy for lobbying and education purposes and should be used more often” (45). Sometimes it takes women to bring attention to the fact that women’s rights are being violated. Sometimes women are the only ones who see the real horror of the violations.
Another example of an organization started by and run by women is the Maendeleo Ya Wanawake. Located in Kenya, this group desires to see women uplifted from all forms of oppression. The WHO reveals that in 1996 this group made significant progress in ending FGM by implementing an alternative initiation ceremony program (54). Their program locates girls eligible for excision and educates their families. The results are very positive. The WHO says, “Alternative coming of age ceremonies can be used to introduce sexuality education and life skills to girls in a way that is acceptable to their parents and their communities” (54). Honoring the traditions and culture surrounding the practice is very important. The WHO elaborates, “It is then easy to judge, condemn, and then to feel that ordering people to stop the practice is the proper course of action. However, this does not always work – as many anti-FGM activists have learned the hard way… Anyone working in this field needs to examine…their own assumptions… and work toward becoming ‘culturally competent’” (77). This task seems to be more easily done by women, especially since the issue pertains to women specifically. Those women who have been able to put aside their own prejudices have been honored by success in their work to end this practice.
One such effective approach occurred in Senegal in 1997. The book, Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Laws and Policies Worldwide, explains that one of the goals behind an approach to the ending of FGM in Senegal was to not only end the practice, but to empower women and have them choose for themselves to leave this practice behind. The result was amazing. Not only did an entire village of women voluntarily abandon the practice, their men supported their decision. A public declaration was made stating that never again would FGM be practiced there. This choice spread from village to village and eventually led to a law in 1999 prohibiting the practice of FGM in Senegal (Rahman and Toubia 77). This movement was led by women who, though not politicians, stood up for their rights and influenced global policies. In turn, this movement has inspired women worldwide to do the same. Whether called “politicians” or “activists” women are beginning to reject this traditional practice and turn to other ways of honoring both their bodies and cultures. These women have what it takes to make change in the world. No one can say, “Women don’t have what it takes to make a difference.” They have already made begun to make a difference.
Works Cited
Althaus, Frances A. “Female Circumcision: Rite of Passage Or Violation of Rights?” International Family Planning Perspectives 23.3 (1997): 130-133. Print.
Committee on Bioethics. “Female Genital Mutilation.” Pediatrics 102.1 (1998): 153-156. Print.
The Quote Garden. 14 Oct 2007. Web. 14 June 2010.
Rahman, Anika, and Nahid Toubia. Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Laws and Policies Worldwide. London: Zed Books Ltd, 2008. Print.
Utz-Billing, I. and H. Kentenich. “Female Genital Mutilation: An Injury, Physical and Mental Harm.” Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology 29.4 (2008): 225-229. Print.
WHO. Department of Woman’s Health. Female Genital Mutilation: A Handbook For Frontline Workers. 2000. Web. 14 June 2010.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Small Saplings
Religion is a strange thing. It moves and changes as cultures shift and the people within them start to think differently. Throughout history, Christianity has undergone multiple modifications in both theology and practical application. During The Reformation, the entirety of the Christian church was in uproar over the new ideas and new principals presented by the, at that time, forward thinkers. It was a period of new discovery and a chance to repair some of the damage Christianity had inadvertently inflicted upon society.
A similar occurrence is taking place in the church today. The modern world is slowly melting away, and in its place are left questions and new thoughts. This is the postmodern world. It is a world full of questions and searching, love and new revelations. In this postmodern world, a new understanding of Christianity is blossoming into something beautiful. The Emergent Church interprets the words and actions of Jesus through the lens of postmodernism and is redefining what following him really means for today’s world.
As the world evolves and enters a new stage of life, the Church also is growing to embrace revolutionary ambitions and ideas. As a plant matures and begins to stretch to new heights and places never before explored, it continues to look to its roots as a source of strength and guidance. It does not, however, remain at the root level. Instead, it looks to experience new things and to nurture the young (and sometimes inexperienced) branches. The Emergent Church, too, looks to its history as a source of wisdom and strength, but also recognizes the importance of new growth and the excitement of going where no one has gone before. It is learning from mistakes while embracing new challenges. Author and public speaker, Brian McLaren, elaborates on this, “When our churches are schools of practice, they make – and change – history. Otherwise, they simply write history and argue about it, and of course, in so doing they tend to repeat it” (Finding Our Way Again 145). This new postmodern generation of Christians wants to write history, while trying to avoid the mistakes made by previous generations of Christians. Phyllis Tickle comments in her book The Great Emergence, “One does not have to be particularly gifted as a seer these days, however, to perceive the Great Emergence already swirling like a balm across that wound, bandaging it with genuinely egalitarian conversation and with an undergirding assumption of shared brotherhood and sisterhood in a world being redeemed” (29). This is a church-wide revolution. It does not have specific requirements as far as age, theology, or maturity, but rather, it looks to the heart of the individual and tries to meet the needs found there, whatever they may be.
The term “Emergent” often carries with it a red flag, as many individuals feel threatened by the thought that Christianity could change. This term however, carries some very special meanings and symbols that inspire the movement behind the term. McLaren explains where the name “Emergent” comes from in his book A Generous Orthodoxy, “Emergents – small saplings that grow up in the in the shadow of the mature forest canopy. In a sense, they may seem dwarfed, stunted, restrained by the shade of the mature trees but in truth they are waiting. Whenever one of the mature trees dies, the emergents are there, ready to soar up and fill the gap and thrive in the light now available to them” (275). This is what is happening. Parts of the church are no longer alive (or relevant) to the world today, and the Emergent Church has seen this death and has risen to learn how to thrive in the sunlight left behind. They are trying to find solutions to the problems that caused death in previous generations of Christianity. McLaren explains another definition of Emergent, “ Emergent Wetlands – wetlands in which semiaquatic plants grow, plants whose roots are in the soil underwater but whose shoots grow up through the surface of the water to take in the full, unfiltered sun. In this sense, emergents are plants that live in different worlds simultaneously” (A Generous Orthodoxy 276). In the same way, the Emergent Church is attempting to live in two separate worlds and bring them closer together. The spiritual world and the physical world are meeting within the body of the Emergent Church as it tries to live out the Kingdom of God here on earth.
So what exactly does the Kingdom of God look like? According to many members of the Emergent Church, it may not measure up to traditional expectations. Perhaps the message of Jesus and the Kingdom he represented are in fact in opposition to the message that the Christian faith has been preaching for many years. This is one of the foundational postmodern thoughts that the Emergent Church professes. McLaren describes it this way, “What if he didn’t come to start a new religion – but rather came to start a political, social, religious, artistic, economic, intellectual, and spiritual revolution that would give birth to a new world…What if the message of Jesus was good news – not just for Christians but also for Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, New Agers, agnostics, and atheists?” (The Secret Message of Jesus 4). In light of these new thoughts, maybe the Gospel is not about the system of beliefs that Modern Christianity has claimed, but rather about a group of values and a way of life that promotes the nurturing of these values.
What are some of these values? In a nutshell, they are they same ones that Jesus preached; love, justice, individuality and community. The postmodern Christian looks for something more than inflexible rules and absolute truths. The goal is to search out the truths that apply to them, truths that transform their lives personally, and that inspire them to live for something more. Peter Rollins, a prominent leader in the United Kingdom’s Emergent Church, simply says, “It’s not a worldview that opposes other worldviews. It’s something that brings life, that brings transformation. I think that this understanding of faith resonates with people who are tired of a religion in which believing the right thing is what it is all about” (qtd. in “Seeds of Doubt”). Rather than seeing Jesus as a “law giver” or “judge,” the Emergent Church looks to Jesus for an example of a new way of life. In this life what is valued is the creativity in the world, the subjectivity of humans and the vibrancy of diversity in all things. Through this way of thinking, these four core values take on new meaning and life.
Love is the most basic and influential of all emotions, yet it is also one of the most complex. At the center of Jesus’ ministry was love. Love the little children, love the adulteress, and love your enemies. In fact, the very reason Jesus’ came to earth was to demonstrate love. The Bible illustrates the reason for Jesus’ ministry in this way, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him” (English Standard Version, John 3:16-17). From the beginning it was about love, and the Emergent Church seeks to continue to apply the concept of love to all aspects of life and in all relationships in the midst of the postmodern world.
The next value identified in both Jesus and in what the Emergent Church seeks to become is justice. This does not mean pointing the finger at sin or carrying out punishments, whether they be deserved or undeserved. Instead it means seeing and acknowledging when unjust situations are occurring around the world and figuring out how to both put an end to them and preventing them in the future. This applies in both private and public situations. The Emergent Church does not see itself as the Judge. It continues to look to Jesus’ words for guidance, “Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive and you will be forgiven… Can a blind man lead a blind man?” (Luke 6:37,39). In the postmodern world, absolutes are almost nonexistent and the Emergent Church recognizes that it cannot provide permanent solutions to all problems. They do not claim to be God.
This movement does, however, believe that it can provide help and solutions to many of the social, emotional, and spiritual problems that the world faces. They see hope in the hopelessness that is the modern world, and seek to bring it into the light of day. Author and speaker Tony Jones describes it in this way, “Contrary to many American evangelicals, emergent Christians don’t tend to think that the world is getting worse and worse until it gets so bad that Jesus has to come back. Instead, emergents think that God’s spirit is moving in the world, and our job as Christians is to cooperate with what God is up to. So you’re less likely to hear emergents arguing about the hot topics of the day, and more likely to find them hard at work, trying to participate with God, so that it might be ‘on earth as it is in heaven.’ Answers have been the order of the day in modern Christianity. But for emergents, it’s the questions that count” (11). This movement sees justice as a form of love more than anything else. According to Dr. Cornel West, “Justice is what love looks like in public” (qtd. in Call + Response). The emergents couldn’t agree more.
While the final two values previously mentioned (individuality and community) seem to be contradictory, they are in fact inseparable and incredibly important in today’s changing world. Recently, individuality has not been nurtured in the ways it should have been. Women have been oppressed simply for being women, gays have been oppressed for being sexually different, and minorities and children are abused and oppressed simply because it is easy to take advantage of them. In this environment, becoming the same as everyone else is essential for survival. In contrast to modernism, postmodernism celebrates the very differences that used to be taboo. The Emergent Church reflects this in their quest for both equality and uniqueness. Each person finds meaning in something, whether it is art, music, poetry, service or parenting. One helpful analogy of this is in the simple statement, “The Kingdom of God is like an arts colony…” (The Secret Message of Jesus 148).
We are each unique and to the Emergent Church, this is because we are designed in the image of God. We each embody certain parts of him and can learn to be in harmony with him through our talents and interests. As The Shack reveals, “A bird’s not defined by being grounded but by his ability to fly. Remember this, humans are not defined by their limitations, but by the intentions I have for them; not by what they seem to be, but by everything it means to be created in my image” (Young 100). Providing an environment that nurtures many different kinds of interests and talents is essential to preserving individuality in the church. This part of the Emergent Church is still a relatively new growth and it will take time to see exactly what a community of independent, and yet connected, individuals really looks like.
The final value mentioned previously is community. This belongs at the end of the list for several reasons. To begin with, community cannot exist successfully without the above-mentioned values. It also is the glue that holds everything within this new movement together. The community of the Emergent Church includes both the roots and the branches of the movement. It encompasses the history of the Church and the possibilities for future generations of Christianity. Community in this context does not stifle people but strives to empower them and build them up in a supportive and encouraging environment. McLaren states that, “in that new reality, the poor and rejected will be embraced and valued and brought back into the community” (The Secret Message of Jesus 23). Author Steven Johnson traces the word “emergence” to this very concept, “Emergence is what happens when the whole is smarter than the sum of its parts. It’s what happens when you have a system of relatively simple-minded component parts – often there are thousands or millions of them – and they interact in relatively simply ways. And yet somehow out of all this interaction some higher-level structure or intelligence appears, usually without any master planner calling the shots. These kinds of systems tend to evolve from the ground up” (qtd. in A Generous Orthodoxy 276). Again we are back to the growth analogy.
This analogy of growth seems to be the best way to describe the current change that is taking place in the world today. This plant of postmodernism is growing from the ground up and is beginning to reach new heights of unexplored territory in the world. The Emergent Church is changing the landscape of religious philosophy in the world today. This can be intimidating to some, as it is just that: a change. A key thing to remember in the midst of all these blowing winds is this, “Growth means change and change involves risk, stepping from the known into the unknown” (Young 115). This describes in one sentence what the “Great Emergence” is all about; growth in order to be a part of something bigger. McLaren describes this growth through the metaphor of tree rings; “Each ring represents not a replacement of the previous rings, not a rejection of them, but an embracing of them, a comprising of them and inclusion of them in something bigger” (A Generous Orthodoxy 277). As the modern world begins to slip away, the Emergent Church is attempting to blossom into something relevant and important in the world. It seeks to bring the Kingdom of God to earth. McLaren adds, “If you’re part of this kingdom, you begin to live in a way that some will say is stupid or naïve. (Turning the other cheek? Walking the second mile? Defeating violence with forgiveness, sacrifice, and love? Come on! Get Real!) But others might see in your way of life the courageous and wild hope that could heal and transform the world” (The Secret Message of Jesus 18). This way of life is different and strange, as is everything postmodern, and yet it is nothing new at all. This is the Emergent Church: small saplings attempting to bring two worlds together.
Works Cited
Call + Response. Justin Dillon. Fair Trade Pictures, 2008. DVD.
English Standard Version. Wheaton, Illinois: Good News Publishers, 2005. Print.
Jones, Tony. “The Emergent Church: Christianity in America is Changing.” Tikkun 23.3 (2008): 10-11. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 28 April 2010.
McLaren, Brian. A Generous Orthodoxy. Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 2004. Print.
---. Finding Our Way Again. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2008. Print.
---. The Secret Message of Jesus. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc, 2006. Print.
“Seeds of Doubt.” Christian Century 126.11 (2009): 20-22 Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 28 April 2010.
Tickle, Phyllis. The Great Emergence. Grand Rapids MI: Baker Books, 2008. Print.
Young, Wm. Paul. The Shack. Newbury Park CA: Windblown Media, 2007. Print.
A similar occurrence is taking place in the church today. The modern world is slowly melting away, and in its place are left questions and new thoughts. This is the postmodern world. It is a world full of questions and searching, love and new revelations. In this postmodern world, a new understanding of Christianity is blossoming into something beautiful. The Emergent Church interprets the words and actions of Jesus through the lens of postmodernism and is redefining what following him really means for today’s world.
As the world evolves and enters a new stage of life, the Church also is growing to embrace revolutionary ambitions and ideas. As a plant matures and begins to stretch to new heights and places never before explored, it continues to look to its roots as a source of strength and guidance. It does not, however, remain at the root level. Instead, it looks to experience new things and to nurture the young (and sometimes inexperienced) branches. The Emergent Church, too, looks to its history as a source of wisdom and strength, but also recognizes the importance of new growth and the excitement of going where no one has gone before. It is learning from mistakes while embracing new challenges. Author and public speaker, Brian McLaren, elaborates on this, “When our churches are schools of practice, they make – and change – history. Otherwise, they simply write history and argue about it, and of course, in so doing they tend to repeat it” (Finding Our Way Again 145). This new postmodern generation of Christians wants to write history, while trying to avoid the mistakes made by previous generations of Christians. Phyllis Tickle comments in her book The Great Emergence, “One does not have to be particularly gifted as a seer these days, however, to perceive the Great Emergence already swirling like a balm across that wound, bandaging it with genuinely egalitarian conversation and with an undergirding assumption of shared brotherhood and sisterhood in a world being redeemed” (29). This is a church-wide revolution. It does not have specific requirements as far as age, theology, or maturity, but rather, it looks to the heart of the individual and tries to meet the needs found there, whatever they may be.
The term “Emergent” often carries with it a red flag, as many individuals feel threatened by the thought that Christianity could change. This term however, carries some very special meanings and symbols that inspire the movement behind the term. McLaren explains where the name “Emergent” comes from in his book A Generous Orthodoxy, “Emergents – small saplings that grow up in the in the shadow of the mature forest canopy. In a sense, they may seem dwarfed, stunted, restrained by the shade of the mature trees but in truth they are waiting. Whenever one of the mature trees dies, the emergents are there, ready to soar up and fill the gap and thrive in the light now available to them” (275). This is what is happening. Parts of the church are no longer alive (or relevant) to the world today, and the Emergent Church has seen this death and has risen to learn how to thrive in the sunlight left behind. They are trying to find solutions to the problems that caused death in previous generations of Christianity. McLaren explains another definition of Emergent, “ Emergent Wetlands – wetlands in which semiaquatic plants grow, plants whose roots are in the soil underwater but whose shoots grow up through the surface of the water to take in the full, unfiltered sun. In this sense, emergents are plants that live in different worlds simultaneously” (A Generous Orthodoxy 276). In the same way, the Emergent Church is attempting to live in two separate worlds and bring them closer together. The spiritual world and the physical world are meeting within the body of the Emergent Church as it tries to live out the Kingdom of God here on earth.
So what exactly does the Kingdom of God look like? According to many members of the Emergent Church, it may not measure up to traditional expectations. Perhaps the message of Jesus and the Kingdom he represented are in fact in opposition to the message that the Christian faith has been preaching for many years. This is one of the foundational postmodern thoughts that the Emergent Church professes. McLaren describes it this way, “What if he didn’t come to start a new religion – but rather came to start a political, social, religious, artistic, economic, intellectual, and spiritual revolution that would give birth to a new world…What if the message of Jesus was good news – not just for Christians but also for Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, New Agers, agnostics, and atheists?” (The Secret Message of Jesus 4). In light of these new thoughts, maybe the Gospel is not about the system of beliefs that Modern Christianity has claimed, but rather about a group of values and a way of life that promotes the nurturing of these values.
What are some of these values? In a nutshell, they are they same ones that Jesus preached; love, justice, individuality and community. The postmodern Christian looks for something more than inflexible rules and absolute truths. The goal is to search out the truths that apply to them, truths that transform their lives personally, and that inspire them to live for something more. Peter Rollins, a prominent leader in the United Kingdom’s Emergent Church, simply says, “It’s not a worldview that opposes other worldviews. It’s something that brings life, that brings transformation. I think that this understanding of faith resonates with people who are tired of a religion in which believing the right thing is what it is all about” (qtd. in “Seeds of Doubt”). Rather than seeing Jesus as a “law giver” or “judge,” the Emergent Church looks to Jesus for an example of a new way of life. In this life what is valued is the creativity in the world, the subjectivity of humans and the vibrancy of diversity in all things. Through this way of thinking, these four core values take on new meaning and life.
Love is the most basic and influential of all emotions, yet it is also one of the most complex. At the center of Jesus’ ministry was love. Love the little children, love the adulteress, and love your enemies. In fact, the very reason Jesus’ came to earth was to demonstrate love. The Bible illustrates the reason for Jesus’ ministry in this way, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him” (English Standard Version, John 3:16-17). From the beginning it was about love, and the Emergent Church seeks to continue to apply the concept of love to all aspects of life and in all relationships in the midst of the postmodern world.
The next value identified in both Jesus and in what the Emergent Church seeks to become is justice. This does not mean pointing the finger at sin or carrying out punishments, whether they be deserved or undeserved. Instead it means seeing and acknowledging when unjust situations are occurring around the world and figuring out how to both put an end to them and preventing them in the future. This applies in both private and public situations. The Emergent Church does not see itself as the Judge. It continues to look to Jesus’ words for guidance, “Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive and you will be forgiven… Can a blind man lead a blind man?” (Luke 6:37,39). In the postmodern world, absolutes are almost nonexistent and the Emergent Church recognizes that it cannot provide permanent solutions to all problems. They do not claim to be God.
This movement does, however, believe that it can provide help and solutions to many of the social, emotional, and spiritual problems that the world faces. They see hope in the hopelessness that is the modern world, and seek to bring it into the light of day. Author and speaker Tony Jones describes it in this way, “Contrary to many American evangelicals, emergent Christians don’t tend to think that the world is getting worse and worse until it gets so bad that Jesus has to come back. Instead, emergents think that God’s spirit is moving in the world, and our job as Christians is to cooperate with what God is up to. So you’re less likely to hear emergents arguing about the hot topics of the day, and more likely to find them hard at work, trying to participate with God, so that it might be ‘on earth as it is in heaven.’ Answers have been the order of the day in modern Christianity. But for emergents, it’s the questions that count” (11). This movement sees justice as a form of love more than anything else. According to Dr. Cornel West, “Justice is what love looks like in public” (qtd. in Call + Response). The emergents couldn’t agree more.
While the final two values previously mentioned (individuality and community) seem to be contradictory, they are in fact inseparable and incredibly important in today’s changing world. Recently, individuality has not been nurtured in the ways it should have been. Women have been oppressed simply for being women, gays have been oppressed for being sexually different, and minorities and children are abused and oppressed simply because it is easy to take advantage of them. In this environment, becoming the same as everyone else is essential for survival. In contrast to modernism, postmodernism celebrates the very differences that used to be taboo. The Emergent Church reflects this in their quest for both equality and uniqueness. Each person finds meaning in something, whether it is art, music, poetry, service or parenting. One helpful analogy of this is in the simple statement, “The Kingdom of God is like an arts colony…” (The Secret Message of Jesus 148).
We are each unique and to the Emergent Church, this is because we are designed in the image of God. We each embody certain parts of him and can learn to be in harmony with him through our talents and interests. As The Shack reveals, “A bird’s not defined by being grounded but by his ability to fly. Remember this, humans are not defined by their limitations, but by the intentions I have for them; not by what they seem to be, but by everything it means to be created in my image” (Young 100). Providing an environment that nurtures many different kinds of interests and talents is essential to preserving individuality in the church. This part of the Emergent Church is still a relatively new growth and it will take time to see exactly what a community of independent, and yet connected, individuals really looks like.
The final value mentioned previously is community. This belongs at the end of the list for several reasons. To begin with, community cannot exist successfully without the above-mentioned values. It also is the glue that holds everything within this new movement together. The community of the Emergent Church includes both the roots and the branches of the movement. It encompasses the history of the Church and the possibilities for future generations of Christianity. Community in this context does not stifle people but strives to empower them and build them up in a supportive and encouraging environment. McLaren states that, “in that new reality, the poor and rejected will be embraced and valued and brought back into the community” (The Secret Message of Jesus 23). Author Steven Johnson traces the word “emergence” to this very concept, “Emergence is what happens when the whole is smarter than the sum of its parts. It’s what happens when you have a system of relatively simple-minded component parts – often there are thousands or millions of them – and they interact in relatively simply ways. And yet somehow out of all this interaction some higher-level structure or intelligence appears, usually without any master planner calling the shots. These kinds of systems tend to evolve from the ground up” (qtd. in A Generous Orthodoxy 276). Again we are back to the growth analogy.
This analogy of growth seems to be the best way to describe the current change that is taking place in the world today. This plant of postmodernism is growing from the ground up and is beginning to reach new heights of unexplored territory in the world. The Emergent Church is changing the landscape of religious philosophy in the world today. This can be intimidating to some, as it is just that: a change. A key thing to remember in the midst of all these blowing winds is this, “Growth means change and change involves risk, stepping from the known into the unknown” (Young 115). This describes in one sentence what the “Great Emergence” is all about; growth in order to be a part of something bigger. McLaren describes this growth through the metaphor of tree rings; “Each ring represents not a replacement of the previous rings, not a rejection of them, but an embracing of them, a comprising of them and inclusion of them in something bigger” (A Generous Orthodoxy 277). As the modern world begins to slip away, the Emergent Church is attempting to blossom into something relevant and important in the world. It seeks to bring the Kingdom of God to earth. McLaren adds, “If you’re part of this kingdom, you begin to live in a way that some will say is stupid or naïve. (Turning the other cheek? Walking the second mile? Defeating violence with forgiveness, sacrifice, and love? Come on! Get Real!) But others might see in your way of life the courageous and wild hope that could heal and transform the world” (The Secret Message of Jesus 18). This way of life is different and strange, as is everything postmodern, and yet it is nothing new at all. This is the Emergent Church: small saplings attempting to bring two worlds together.
Works Cited
Call + Response. Justin Dillon. Fair Trade Pictures, 2008. DVD.
English Standard Version. Wheaton, Illinois: Good News Publishers, 2005. Print.
Jones, Tony. “The Emergent Church: Christianity in America is Changing.” Tikkun 23.3 (2008): 10-11. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 28 April 2010.
McLaren, Brian. A Generous Orthodoxy. Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 2004. Print.
---. Finding Our Way Again. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2008. Print.
---. The Secret Message of Jesus. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc, 2006. Print.
“Seeds of Doubt.” Christian Century 126.11 (2009): 20-22 Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 28 April 2010.
Tickle, Phyllis. The Great Emergence. Grand Rapids MI: Baker Books, 2008. Print.
Young, Wm. Paul. The Shack. Newbury Park CA: Windblown Media, 2007. Print.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)