|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: 'Resident aliens' - how does it work? What does it look like?
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
This is follow on from the Constantine thread.
If Christians are to be 'not of this world' and 'resident aliens' what should this look like in practice?
I'm interested in practical and positive suggestions - not negative reactions against so-called 'Constantinian Christians' and 'Constantinian churches'.
On this thread I'm not interested in pointing the finger at this, that or the other group - be they RCs, Orthodox, Anglicans, Baptists, Anabaptists, Mennonites or anything else.
What I'm interested in is practical suggestions on how Christians are supposed to engage positively with the world around them.
I'm interested in suggestions from all church traditions and streams.
And yes, I am looking at Steve Langton to some extent ... but I'm not looking for a continuation of the kind of 'Constantinianism = bad' - 'Anabaptism = good' dichotomy that seems to surface a fair bit here.
I want practical examples. I want practical suggestions.
Withdrawal from the world - whilst that might be a suitable tactic in some circumstances - is not an option on this thread.
I want examples. I want answers. I want practical suggestions - not pietistic hand-wringing at the apparent sins and short-comings of everyone else.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
It seems to me we have a number of nice little statements about this: "Judge not lest ye be judged", "Do unto others" and "Trust in Allah but tie up your camel."
As for withdrawing from the world, isn't that a variation of the Pharisee's stance, just one more way to not care about one's neighbors?
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
I mentioned this on the other thread, but I'm partial to Greg Boyd's take on it. He isn't so much interested in particular outcomes in terms of pitting "the world" vs. "the Kingdom", but rather particular methodologies, In this he's drawing heavily on his mentor, Walter Wink. The "way of the world" is to seek "power over"-- to bring about change thru coercion (including the legislative agenda so dear to American Christians these days), force, and even violence. Wink would describe this as "the myth of redemptive violence". The way of the Kingdom, otoh, is "power under"-- following Jesus in an incarnational ministry that seeks to bring out change through service and sacrifice-- the whole "the way to gain your life is to lose it" thing.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
Couple of thoughts that jump into mind, at least as peripherals -
A resident alien doesn't equate patriotism for the place he lives with Godliness, if only because he doesn't particularly identify with the place he is visiting, but with a different place.
An alien probably doesn't focus his life on making his mark on, being remembered by, the community he is just visiting; to the extend these are a goal it's to make his mark on, be remembered by, his real home.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
At the same time, it's probably best to remember the term "resident aliens" comes from elsewhere (most notably Stanley Hauerwas in a book I failed to appreciate as much as many others) not from Jesus. Jesus' words were "in the world but not of the world". IMHO, "resident aliens" has far too negative a connotation for the world, and far too distant our relation to it. I think of Jesus weeping over Jerusalem, Jeremiah exhorting the exiles to "seek the prosperity of the city you live in". We are not to be shaped and formed and controlled by the "ways of the world" (or "powers that be"). But that doesn't equate to "we're just a-passin' thru" either. This is the world God created, the world God loves, and the world that God is redeeming. We are to be IN it-- ALL in. As Jesus went "all in". Not "of" it-- not conformed-- but thoroughly IN. Because ultimately, there is no "other world". There isn't some other place that's our "true home." Jesus tells us the Kingdom of God is upon us-- right here.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
No time for a major contribution (I'm due an early morning - well, later today now!) but just one thing...
Jesus didn't use the term 'resident aliens', but its Greek equivalent is used by Peter in I Pet 1v1 and in 2v11. The word is 'parepidEmois' in Greek - he also in 2v11 uses the similar meaning word 'paroikos'. He also associates it with the Jewish concept of the 'diaspora' (though other verses imply that he is writing to a non-Jewish community). That would relate the idea to Jewish ideas about 'living in exile' in a reference in Jeremiah which isn't to hand right now but I'll try and mention it sometime this evening when I get back home.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
ah, yes, quite right. I'd forgotten those two passages.
Perhaps what we really see, then, is a tension in the biblical text-- the same sort of tension we see in John 17's "in the world but not of it". We error whenever we fall to far to one side or the other. We error when we align ourselves too closely to the "powers that be"-- to the agenda and means of this world. But we also error when we distance ourselves too far or harden our hearts against the world that God loves.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
I think it means to echo Jesus' own life--to set aside one's own rights for the sake of others as needed, but to shoulder all one's responsibilities without bitching about it. So if we're half-citizens, we're the half that does the work.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
I will give you an example of how Christianity eventually survived in the Roman Empire.
It was during a rather nasty episode of Bubonic Plague. Most of the Romans deserted the city leaving only the sick and dying. However, Christians stayed in the city, ministering to the sick and dying. Romans were very impressed with this and many converted to Christianity.
A resident alien today speaks the truth in love often against the cultural attitudes of today. Pope Francis comes to mind. He is taking on the bureaucracy of the Vatican. He is like a breath of fresh air in a stale church. Now, granted, in my mind he has not gone far enough but a long journey begins with a single step.
My son is another example. Last year he participated in a Young Adults in Global Mission service. He was in Palestine teaching English. He saw the abuses Palestinians have to put up with. While he could not speak up against what he saw while there for fear of losing his visa, he is very much active now in speaking up for them. As a resident alien he worked to give his students hope. He was an adviser to their Model UN program. The Palestinian kids had never been able to participate in any international Model UN conference before. But he was able to have a group participate in Denmark last year.
This is what a resident alien does. He or she takes everything to the next level, seeking justice in an unjust world.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
There is some danger in being a resident alien and allowing resident aliens. Society requires that all its parts are in a mutual chain of responsibility and participation. If anyone is not allowed to fully partake of that or do not wish to partake of it in a way that fully sustains the society it comes from, then it's medically equivalent to an infection or some other form if immune disturbance.
Of course, societies are ideally dynamic, so there is some leeway in this, but if the society it is happening in is already too heavily structured to be able to dynamically respond, it's an illness.
[ 21. March 2015, 12:17: Message edited by: itsarumdo ]
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
It should perhaps be pointed out that Christians are 'resident aliens' in a slightly different way to, say, my friend who is a Pakistani living in the UK.
For one thing, the Christian 'resident alien' may in fact be paradoxically living in his native country, yet he now owes primary allegiance to another kingdom.
But many of the problems that might bring are offset because the 'other kingdom' of the Christian is NOT a rival earthly nation which threatens war in earthly terms, or other violence, against the land he lives in, whether it be his native land or another earthly country in which he is a 'resident alien' in the conventional 'this world' sense. Rather Christians are citizens of a 'kingdom not of this world' and represented by other kingdom citizens throughout the kingdoms of this world.
The passage I mentioned from Jeremiah is important here; it is chapter 29;4ff, where the exiles are told to make their homes in the land where God has sent them into exile, and to "Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord for it; for its welfare shall be your welfare". They are indeed to look forward to a day when they will no longer be exiles, but in the meantime they are to trust God and represent him in exile. Christians in joining God's people become 'resident aliens' in a similar sense.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, we all know the theory, Steve. But how does it work out in practice? What does it look like?
Forgive me, but you seem very good at stating what Christians shouldn't be like but I don't get much of an impression from your posts about we should be doing. It's all thou shalt not, rather than any kind of positive mandate or manifesto.
I'm not accusing you of the following necessarily but it reminds me to some extent of a very pietistic men's meeting I once attended when the visiting speaker noted how, as he drove in, he'd noticed how there'd been a sign from the city council saying how it was 'making things happen.'
No, the preacher declared, it wasn't the council that made things happen but we as the people of God ...
Lots of cheers and Amens.
I found myself wondering how this could be - all we were doing was holding loud and lively pietistic meetings. In whst way could we possibly claim to be making anything happen?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
It should perhaps be pointed out that Christians are 'resident aliens' in a slightly different way to, say, my friend who is a Pakistani living in the UK.
It should be noted that the 'resident alien' communities from the Indian sub-continent substantially enriched British culture, creating an entirely new cuisine of British curry. And, they didn't stay as resident aliens, becoming full citizens of the UK voting in elections, and holding positions throughout government - I hope within the next few decades we'll be seeing a PM who has ancestry traced back to one of the communities who had been 'resident aliens'.
What aspects of your friends 'resident alien-ness' do you want the church to emulate? Bringing our own particular flavour to how we view the world to be part of the cuisine of our country of residence? To become full citizens taking our place as equals besides those who have lived here longer?
quote:
But many of the problems that might bring are offset because the 'other kingdom' of the Christian is NOT a rival earthly nation which threatens war in earthly terms, or other violence, against the land he lives in
Even in purely geopolitical terms that isn't always the case, it depends heavily upon the country you find yourself resident in. There was an extended period in Japan, for example, where simply being not-Japanese was sufficient cause to have you shipped out of the country, or worse. A European simply stepping off a ship onto Japanese soil, let alone seeking to live as a 'resident alien' in Japan, was considered an act of violence against Japanese cultural purity. There are mindless thugs in the UK who would like to see a similar sense of UK cultural purity with anyone who does not hold values sufficiently close to that to be kicked out of the country.
There are places in the modern world where being a Christian is seen as a threat to the cultural and religious identity of that country. Places where converting to the Christian faith is seen as an act of violence against the nation, one that in some cases is seen as sufficiently threatening to warrant a death sentence. Being a 'resident alien' Christian in such places is a threat to the nation.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I also find it interesting that the vision of a 'resident alien' church Steve seems to be advocating is very different from what we see of the church in the first few centuries (ie: before Constantine) that was also described as 'resident alien' by Peter.
That early church was making strong political statements all over the place.
In a culture where it was expected to be loyal to Caesar and his representatives, to serve the Roman state, to declare "Caesar is Lord", what did the Church say? "You can't serve two masters", "Jesus is Lord".
In a time when the political power of Caesar was based on the common people, who formed the bulk of the legions, he ensured that support by providing all Roman citizens an allowance of free grain, so they were never hungry, and slightly later than the Gospel period entertainment to distract them from problems - bread and circuses. What did the Church do? They prayed "Give us our daily ration of bread", they celebrated a meal remembering Christ who declared "I am the bread of life, whoever comes to me will never hunger".
If you read Acts 10 and 11, at no point does Peter tell the Centurion "Now you've been baptised, you're a 'resident alien' and must resign your commission in the legion". In Acts 16, Paul doesn't tell the jailer he needs to stop acting as an agent of the state, holding people against their will. Are any of the tax collectors we meet in the Gospels told to stop collecting taxes?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
Yes, Alan. There are lands in which being a Christian is decidedly unsafe. These lands tend to be places which are either dictatorial, like Stalinist Russia, or places where the local religion takes a 'sacral' form - that is, it is related to the state in a form essentially similar to what we've been calling in a Christian context 'Constantinianism'. For example, Shinto in Japan.
It is for this reason that Christians are taught to be peaceable resident aliens. Many territories will find 'non-conformists' a problem; they must not be given further positive reason to persecute Christians on grounds that they are a threat of actual rebellion. And that includes ideally they must not be given such grounds by the existence anywhere in the world of Christians who believe in being such a positive threat, setting up 'Christian states' and threatening war, persecution and conquest against non-Christians.
Peter is rather emphatic about this in his first epistle which I suggest every participant in this thread should go off and read - read deeply and repeatedly.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
Rather than "resident aliens", would it not be better to use the term "exiles" - which is surely more "biblical" and then opens the door to all sorts of insights from Israel's experiences of exile in Babylon. This, it seems to me, is surely one part of what Peter (a Jew) would have understood by the term "resident alien".
As always, Brueggemann would be a good person to consult for ideas on what "exilic living" might look like.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
It so happens, Oscar, that the term 'resident aliens' has been given some currency by a well-known book of a few years ago by Stanley Hauerwas, and a sequel. It's also, as I pointed out back upthread, the near enough literal translation of one of Peter's words.
There isn't an exact equivalent between the term in England and what the Bible implies. But it is pretty close and conveys the unsettling idea of being a citizen of heaven living on earth. Peter says a great deal about it; and the passage I quoted from Jeremiah is a starting point in the OT, from the exile period, which leads to the distinctive NT usage.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
It so happens, Oscar, that the term 'resident aliens' has been given some currency by a well-known book of a few years ago by Stanley Hauerwas
Yes. As I mentioned upthread, that's probably why I have a somewhat lukewarm reaction to the term-- didn't really appreciate Hauerwas' book, which seemed like one long straw man-ish rant vs. Niehbur.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Forgive me, but you continually write and act Steve as if none if the other contributors here are as familiar with those verses in the Petrine epistles as you are yourself - and that if only we read and studied them sufficiently we would all come to the same conclusions as you have.
You also post as if there is no other possible way to read the NT than the one you read it.
The point is, any number of people could come along and 'call' you or any one of us on something or other they may believe we are insufficiently NT enough on. Heck, a sacramentalist could accuse you of not having a sufficiently developed eucharistic doctrine - for instance - and cite their understanding of John 6 in support of that.
Meanwhile, you have yet to supply any positive or practical example or instance of what being a 'resident alien might involve.
Reading your posts I get the impression that it is all about what we don't do - rather than what we actually do.
Not being a member of some nasty, wicked, evil 'Constaninian' state church is what it seems to boil down to. Surely there must be more to it than that?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
The passage I mentioned from Jeremiah is important here; it is chapter 29;4ff, where the exiles are told to make their homes in the land where God has sent them into exile, and to "Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord for it; for its welfare shall be your welfare". They are indeed to look forward to a day when they will no longer be exiles, but in the meantime they are to trust God and represent him in exile. Christians in joining God's people become 'resident aliens' in a similar sense.
There is an important difference in the NT understanding of this concept from its implementation in the OT.
In the OT the Israelites are actual, not spiritual resident aliens. Their status of exile presumably deprived them of certain rights and certainly did not make it possible for them to have dual citizenship.
In the NT, our "exile" here is figurative. It is perfectly possible to be a Christian and a national citizen, and indeed be involved as both. In fact I'd argue that 1 Peter, which as it happens I have read and re-read, makes a good case for engagement on both fronts. Which is why I took part in the Charlie Hebdo march and why I preached this on that day.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Gamaliel;
quote:
Meanwhile, you have yet to supply any positive or practical example or instance of what being a 'resident alien might involve.
Who needs my examples? Why do you think I keep referring you to Peter and Paul who are very positive and practical - but not at all 'Constantinian'!
by Gamaliel;
quote:
Not being a member of some nasty, wicked, evil 'Constaninian' state church is what it seems to boil down to. Surely there must be more to it than that?
As I repeatedly say, it's about following the positive teaching of the NT on how the Church is supposed to relate to the world. As that whole scheme is completely subverted by the 'Constantinian' way of doing things, obviously rejecting that route is part of it. But I prefer the positive also - it's just unfortunate there are so many people still following the negative route that Constantine started and unwilling to take on the NT challenge to live differently.
Haven't time for further right now; will be back late evening. Meantime what about a specific opinion from you on my post above at 00.22 this morning??
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Peter and Paul who are very positive and practical - but not at all 'Constantinian'!
![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif) They are not 'Constantinian' because at the time they were writing, Christianity had not expanded to the point where interaction of church and state had become a live issue.
That's why you can't look back to the NT in isolation and expect it to give a definitive answer on this, any more than you can expect a definitive, clear-cut answer from it on some of the ethical issues thrown up by progress in medicine.
I tend to agree with you that Peter or Paul might not have approved of the full-blown church-state fusion that followed, but I don't think it's a given that they were protoanabpatists either. You skip too lightly over the biblical case for engagement with the authorities.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
by Gamaliel;
quote:
Meanwhile, you have yet to supply any positive or practical example or instance of what being a 'resident alien might involve.
Who needs my examples?
Oh, I don't know. Maybe because the question was asked what being a 'resident alien' would look like. Today, in the sort of democratic nation states we live in. Nice practical examples - can 'resident aliens' vote, hold political office, serve in the police or army? You are the person here who is advocating a 'resident alien' ideal, so we're asking you for those examples. Something that will help us get a handle on what it means.
quote:
Why do you think I keep referring you to Peter and Paul who are very positive and practical
Well, stop referencing them. Tell us how you interpret these verses. With particular emphasis possibly on how your interpretation presents the positive and practical side of 'resident alien'.
At the moment I suppose we can guess at what you mean. But making guesses as to what someone else will say is a very stupid way of having a discussion with them. We want to know what you mean, then we can engage with what you actually say.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Alan Cresswell: Nice practical examples - can 'resident aliens' vote, hold political office, serve in the police or army?
(I think they can vote in local elections in the Netherlands.)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
If you read Acts 10 and 11, at no point does Peter tell the Centurion "Now you've been baptised, you're a 'resident alien' and must resign your commission in the legion". In Acts 16, Paul doesn't tell the jailer he needs to stop acting as an agent of the state, holding people against their will. Are any of the tax collectors we meet in the Gospels told to stop collecting taxes?
I'd like to highlight these examples - these were the ones I used in Steve's original thread to his contention that Christians should not be involved in vocations that smacked of Constantinianism - I'd like to see his answers here, because all I see is a lot of dancing around the issue.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
An interesting point - especially because I know that there are a few Nonconformist ministers who refuse to conduct weddings, or even have their buildings registered for them, because they feel that "a church should not be an agent of the state". (Just to clarify: they're not anti-marriage and are quite happy to bless couples who have first "done the legal bit" at the Town Hall. Of course that's the normal pattern in many European countries, anyway).
I believe that there are a few churches which refuse to register as charities (and choose to forego the benefits thereof) for the same reason.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
If you read Acts 10 and 11, at no point does Peter tell the Centurion "Now you've been baptised, you're a 'resident alien' and must resign your commission in the legion".
No, but I understand that in later years it was seen as incompatible for a Christian to be in the Roman army because (a) legionaries had to swear allegiance to the Emperor as God and (b) they didn't feel that they should kill. Don't know how widespread this view was, though.
[ 22. March 2015, 13:01: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Why do you think I keep referring you to Peter and Paul who are very positive and practical - but not at all 'Constantinian'!
Okay. So, Paul. What did he do when he was in trouble with the local authorities?
Did he:
(a) claim that as a citizen of Heaven the court had no jurisdiction over him?
(b) damned the earthly authorities to do their worst because God would save him?
(c) claim his rights as a Roman citizen and appealed to the emperor himself?
If you went for (c), please explain how that fits in with Paul behaving like a 'resident alien'.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
Just a comment about nonconformist ministers refusing to be agents of the state in performing the rite of marriage.
I tend to agree with their position. I think all people should get married by a licensed civil authority. Then, if they want to have a religious blessing, they can go to the church of their choice and do what it takes to get church's blessing.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Cheekily, why do you keep referring me back to a handful of Pauline and Petrine texts? Well perhaps it's because you are prone to proof-texting rather than engaging with NT texts in a less two-dimensional way.
More charitably, I do see some hints of positive and practical actions underneath your posts - but I would like to see these expanded and elucidated. Instead, for the most part I am afraid the vibes I pick up are those of a somewhat judgemental and Pharisaical attitude towards other churches and other Christians. I am giving you the opportunity to correct that impression and challenge Richard Baxter's old adage that Anabaptists were on some kind of holier than thou crusade.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
Helps me to think of this in terms of promoting an "alternative culture" to the one prevailing around me. Giving away a significant proportion of your disposable income which means you have fewer possessions than people around you, or similar possessions of lower quality would be examples. So that's from a mindset that has a notion about storing up treasures in heaven.
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
talking of resident aliens, there's a huge spider crawling across my wall
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
talking of resident aliens, there's a huge spider crawling across my wall
Maybe just "passin' thru'"
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
The term doesn't imply that one is an Anabaptist. Augustine argued that Christians were primarily citizens of the City of God and tolerated the earthly Babylon as a short term compromise but, in practice, his politics were what Steve would call Constantinism.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Eutychus;
quote:
They are not 'Constantinian' because at the time they were writing, Christianity had not expanded to the point where interaction of church and state had become a live issue.
Are you quite sure you're reading the same Bible I am? (Usually NIV, occasionally TEV, often Berkeley, quite often Greek/English(RSV) Interlinear NT) Interaction of church and state is a live issue throughout the NT from the nativity narratives of the new-born King of the Jews all the way to Revelation; if you can't see that, I'm very worried.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Truman White:
quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
talking of resident aliens, there's a huge spider crawling across my wall
Maybe just "passin' thru'"
If it were my wall, I'd be hurrying him on to his future and eternal home...
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Truman White:
quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
talking of resident aliens, there's a huge spider crawling across my wall
Maybe just "passin' thru'"
If it were my wall, I'd be hurrying him on to his future and eternal home...
You could serenade him on his way with this
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I can't see why you're worried, Steve Langton. I don't think Eutychus - or any one else here - is calling for the kind of 'Constantinian' stereotype you are so concerned about.
Eutychus is a non-conformist and he's repeatedly said that he isn't particularly in favour of state churches.
I would submit that you are dealing with an anachronistic image of what so-called 'Constantinian' churches are actually like.
I'm not saying that there isn't a case to answer, but the idea that the contemporary CofE, say, or the contemporary Roman Catholic Church for that matter is some kind of hot-bed of anti-Semitism and potentially Inquisition-like activity is over-egging the pudding.
Whatever view of 'Constantinianism' you have, it's based, I suggest, on how these churches were 500 years ago and not how they are now.
I also think it's the height of naivety to suggest that if only we could shrug off the remnants of Christendom then we'd see some kind of revival.
Revival - in its traditional sense - depends, to a large extent, I would suggest on the concept of Christendom.
The Wesleys and even Billy Graham would have made little head-way unless they were operating within a broadly Christian, historically Christendom paradigm.
To suggest otherwise is historically inaccurate and spiritually naive.
Nominalism is far from ideal - but if it hadn't been for some kind of nominal patina of residual Christian faith then neither the Wesleys, the 19th century revivalists nor 20th century evangelists would have been able to win many converts.
Like it or loath it, Christendom created the conditions for the kind of Free Church non-conformity you hold so dear.
There is no way around that.
It is a fact.
Now, as Christendom crumbles, I submit that we are all heading into survival mode rather than revival mode.
I'm all for 'gathered' and intentional churches - fellowships of true and sincere believers. Post-Christendom, I think that's the default position that we're all heading into. Whether those are conditions that promote revival is a moot point. I would argue that they don't.
The intentional, 'sectarian' model is undoubtedly the kind of 'plausibility structure' that all of us are going to adopt - or have adopted to a greater or lesser extent - as we head into the choppy waters of post-Christendom.
To that extent, you've got a point.
Otherwise, I find your presentation rather simplistic and facile.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
by Eutychus;
quote:
They are not 'Constantinian' because at the time they were writing, Christianity had not expanded to the point where interaction of church and state had become a live issue.
Are you quite sure you're reading the same Bible I am? (Usually NIV, occasionally TEV, often Berkeley, quite often Greek/English(RSV) Interlinear NT) Interaction of church and state is a live issue throughout the NT from the nativity narratives of the new-born King of the Jews all the way to Revelation; if you can't see that, I'm very worried.
Yes, and one of the recurring themes is one that uses well known (at the time, at least) stories of Augustus Caesar - and I would suggest by implication the subsequent Roman Emperors - and used these to describe Christ and His purpose.
I think we would both agree that the implication is that Christ has come to be the King/Emperor of a new Kingdom/Empire. Where we disagree, because the Scriptures are silent or unclear, is the extent that the Kingdom of Christ will be similar or dissimilar to the Roman Empire.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Gamaliel;
quote:
I can't see why you're worried, Steve Langton.
My worry here is quite specific and limited. Eutychus responded to my comment that neither Peter nor Paul were 'Constantinian' with the comment
quote:
They are not 'Constantinian' because at the time they were writing, Christianity had not expanded to the point where interaction of church and state had become a live issue.
Now OK, if you're even more pedantic than me (and that should really worry you) it is a bit anachronistic to use the phrase 'Constantinian' of something written before he existed; but surely it was obvious that I simply meant "What Paul and Peter taught was clearly in disagreement with the ideas we have since come to think of as 'Constantinianism'".
But suggesting as Eutychus did that interaction between church and state was not a 'live issue' in NT times is surely an obvious massive misstatement. Again, they may not have been using our precise terminology, but 'state and church' issues are very much 'live issues' as I said throughout the NT, and Peter and Paul do deal with the issues, and in a way that very much disagrees with 'Constantinianism' (and BTW is stated in a very positive form in its own terms, not just as a negative response to the later events).
Before I respond further I'd also still like to see your specific response to my post at 00.22 this morning, itself responding to Alan C. And maybe other Shipmates' responses as well....
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Interaction of church and state is a live issue throughout the NT from the nativity narratives of the new-born King of the Jews all the way to Revelation; if you can't see that, I'm very worried.
Instead of parading your breadth of Bible versions (and presumably re-reading 1 Peter once more, as you enjoined us to do) you would do better, for the purposes of discussing, to read what posters actually put.
I did not say interaction of church and state was not discussed in the NT. I said that Christianity hadn't expanded to the point where it had become a live issue, i.e. in terms of actual government.
In the NT Christians are still a tiny minority. By the time Constantine came along, there were so many that they were - like it or not - a political force within the Roman Empire by sheer weight of numbers.
That was an entirely new issue which is not addressed directly in the NT simply because it had not yet come about.
[x-post]
[ 22. March 2015, 22:02: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Alan Cresswell;
quote:
Where we disagree, because the Scriptures are silent or unclear, is the extent that the Kingdom of Christ will be similar or dissimilar to the Roman Empire.
Jesus was neither silent nor unclear - "My kingdom is not of this world". And given all the other stuff in the NT outlining the position the church is meant to adopt, I'm again wondering are you sure you're using the same NT most people do? A kingdom whose warfare is not with physical weapons, which is to be 'subject to the powers that be' and not rebel against them, and whose members are told things like not to be 'allotriepiskopoi/managers-of-other-people's-affairs' is surely prima facie VERY dissimilar to the Roman Empire.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Eutychus;
quote:
I did not say interaction of church and state was not discussed in the NT. I said that Christianity hadn't expanded to the point where it had become a live issue, i.e. in terms of actual government.
I know what you wrote. And I still say that church and state issues were well 'alive' in the NT era and that the NT provides info on how to deal with it. 'Church and State issues' are explicit in Jesus' claim to be Messiah, and the fact that he clearly chose not to follow certain ways of being Messiah is extremely important to all subsequent discussion of those issues. It didn't need to wait for Constantine and the possibility of a 'Christian Roman Empire' before those issues were considered. They were live issues the moment Jesus claimed to be the successor to David. They were certainly live in Jesus' trial before Pilate. And the NT makes provision on the subject which unfortunately Constantine and his successors ignored.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
A kingdom whose warfare is not with physical weapons, which is to be 'subject to the powers that be' and not rebel against them, and whose members are told things like not to be 'allotriepiskopoi/managers-of-other-people's-affairs' is surely prima facie VERY dissimilar to the Roman Empire.
The NT says we're citizens of a Kingdom that is in the world but not off the world. What does that mean? The NT is largely silent, because it's not something that the authors of the NT needed to tackle. They did have some issues to tackle, and for instance the evidence is that an armed revolt against Rome, or support for the Jewish rebellions, was not considered right. Some of the methods used by contemporary political powers (eg: the Roman Empire) are not methods we should be using. But, that doesn't answer the question of if a political system could be formed and sustained by other methods whether that would also be wrong. The question isn't addressed in the NT simply because it was not a possibility at the time - the church was too small, and besides it's clear that many of the NT authors thought that they were going to see the Day of the Lord any time now and there were more urgent things to do than try and establish the Kingdom through the slow process of political action.
Which doesn't stop the NT writers telling Christians to fulfill their political roles with integrity, honesty and justice. Soldiers to be satisfied with their pay and not extort a few wee extras from the people. Tax collectors to not cheat people. Masters to treat their slaves well. Advice to the rich and politically powerful. Christians are called to use their public positions as a) a witness to Christ and b) to act to reduce the evils in this world and further the aims of righteousness and justice.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
I'm aware that Hosts can take a 'dim view' of repetitive posting but I also believe this one to be very important, and directly relevant to Alan C's current line of argument....
by Steve Langton, just over 24 hours ago;
quote:
Yes, Alan. There are lands in which being a Christian is decidedly unsafe. These lands tend to be places which are either dictatorial, like Stalinist Russia, or places where the local religion takes a 'sacral' form - that is, it is related to the state in a form essentially similar to what we've been calling in a Christian context 'Constantinianism'. For example, Shinto in Japan.
It is for this reason that Christians are taught to be peaceable resident aliens. Many territories will find 'non-conformists' a problem; they must not be given further positive reason to persecute Christians on grounds that they are a threat of actual rebellion. And that includes ideally they must not be given such grounds by the existence anywhere in the world of Christians who believe in being such a positive threat, setting up 'Christian states' and threatening war, persecution and conquest against non-Christians.
The point being that Christians need to be in a position in effect of neutrality in the wars of 'the world' and whatever association of church and state you may be envisaging must NOT compromise that.
As a current example, native-born Christians in Muslim lands face a just-about-acceptable risk of persecution for being 'non-conformists' within the surrounding society.
They also very clearly face a further unacceptable risk in that they may be perceived as allies/supporters of 'the Crusaders', that is, nations perceived as 'Christian' which are currently fighting in the Middle East.
This would be a persecution not for being simply 'Christian' but for posing a military threat directly related to the perception of a 'Christian state' and the assumption that 'Christians' pose such a threat to their native Islamic state.
It has to be said that while obviously those who persecute Christians for that reason must bear a portion of the responsibility and will no doubt be held accountable by God for it, it is also true that those direct persecutors are in a position to claim some justification for their actions, a justification essentially supplied by the people who have created that perception of Christianity - that is, the 'Constantinians' and their 'Christendom' idea.
God will surely hold those people to account alongside the actual persecutors; and it will not be a light matter, to have endangered God's people and compromised witness to the Gospel by disobeying God's instruction on how the church should relate to the world.
And even what Eutychus, I think, described as the 'residual Constantinianism' in Western countries has sufficed to create that risk and cause lethal persecution....
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Doc Tor;
quote:
Okay. So, Paul. What did he do when he was in trouble with the local authorities?
Did he:
(a) claim that as a citizen of Heaven the court had no jurisdiction over him?
(b) damned the earthly authorities to do their worst because God would save him?
(c) claim his rights as a Roman citizen and appealed to the emperor himself?
If you went for (c), please explain how that fits in with Paul behaving like a 'resident alien'.
First thing to say is that neither your (a) nor your (b) would be appropriate Christian actions or in line with the general Christian teaching.
Even Jesus accepted Pilate's jurisdiction, though pointing out that it was only by divine permission. Paul of course taught 'subjection to' the earthly authorities, and not rebelling against them, though in some circumstances both he and Peter would clearly agree that Christians would have to 'obey God rather than man' in cases of conflict - but also in such a case still accept the authority of the government and accept the punishment the government chose to apply.
'Damning the authorities' would hardly be helpful in any way whatever, and saying 'God will save me' is true but of course doesn't necessarily mean Paul would avoid martyrdom. Worth pointing out that a major part of the impact of Christians arose precisely from their conviction that the God who had raised Jesus from death could 'save' them even through a martyr's death, and their acting on that conviction rather than responding with armed rebellion like, say, the Jews in 70CE and 132CE.
In a rather heated situation what Paul does there is in effect to appeal beyond the local court to a higher human court to clarify how Rome would see the new faith - that seems totally in order. As Eutychus and others have pointed out, this 'resident alienness' of Christians is not an exact parallel to the regular earthly version and to some extent involves a kind of dual citizenship. This thread is about sorting out the limits of that situation.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gracie
Shipmate
# 3870
|
Posted
Steve, having read several of these lengthy threads you seem to me to be confusing being a "resident alien" on earth with being a "resident alien" in a particular country. In 1 Peter Christians are called to live as "resident aliens" or "strangers and pilgrims" on earth - i.e. recognising that this current state of things in the world is not our eternal destiny. It doesn't say that Christians shouldn't engage with secular government in whatever country they happen to live.
--------------------
When someone is convinced he’s an Old Testament prophet there’s not a lot you can do with him rationally. - Sine
Posts: 1090 | From: En lieu sûr | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
A kingdom (...) whose members are told things like not to be 'allotriepiskopoi/managers-of-other-people's-affairs' is surely prima facie VERY dissimilar to the Roman Empire.
I suspect you are referring to 1 Peter 4:15. Which says this: quote:
But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters.
Leaving aside your translation (or rather, I supsect, J.I. Packer's) of allotriepiskopoi as "managers of other people's affairs", you have wrenched this phrase entirely out of context.
Peter is talking about the things Christians should not have to suffer for - the other things in the list are unequivocally undesirable, as is the commonly accepted translation of "meddling".
If you insist on making it mean "managers of other people's affairs", this exhortation focuses on the stupidity of suffering for doing so - presumably by being incompetent.
Arguing that this exhortation somehow constitutes a Petrine prohibition on being managers of other people's affairs really is special pleading.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
Gamaliel writes
Now, as Christendom crumbles, I submit that we are all heading into survival mode rather than revival mode.
Total garbage. Christianity is riding an unprecedented wave of international growth. You're stuck in your Christian ghetto. Climb out for a bit and try taking a global view.
Main answer to your o/p is evangelism. That's how Christianity became a global faith in the first place, and how it's expanding today.
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
