Jesus was a radical in many senses. His teaching is radical, particularly when it comes to money, power, violence, leadership, and service. If someone wants to follow Jesus and his teaching today what might that look like?
What is Christian spirituality? This has always seemed a nebulous concept to me, particularly in the manner that many people talk about it. Yet, I believe in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And Jesus gave clear teaching about how he sent the Holy Spirit to be with his followers.
What is the role and place of different church traditions today, for better or for worse?
Due to the Reformation in sixteenth-century Europe, several well-defined church traditions emerged: Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed (Calvin), and Anabaptist. Each provides a distinct interpretation of the Bible and a concrete institutional (communal) expression of what it means to follow Jesus. Given that all this happened five hundred years ago, to what extent are these traditions relevant and/or helpful today, particularly in the diverse contexts present in the global church? To what extent today are these traditions faithful to their origins? And should they be?
What should be the relationship between church and state?
You can see I like asking questions!
In the theology reading group this month we read and discussed a book that does address these questions from an Anabaptist perspective, Life Together in the Spirit: A Radical Spirituality for the Twenty-First Century, by John Driver. It was selected to be part of the Global Anabaptist-Mennonite Shelf of Literature, an initiative of the Mennonite World Conference. The book was written in a Latin American context, and originally published in Spanish, as Convivencia radical: espiritualidad para el siglo 21 The English edition is enhanced by short responses from Mennonite leaders from D.R. Congo, Zimbabwe, India, Taiwan, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Ecuador. Each reflects on the relevance of the book to their own context. At the end of each chapter there are discussion questions.
I found the book refreshing, informative, and challenging. Before reading it I knew very little about Anabaptism. Here are a few choice sections.
Anabaptist spirituality is not abstract, but rather concrete. It does not embrace reductionism or dualism, but rather has an integrated (holistic) world view.
In marked contrast to many traditional spiritualities, the Bible does not allow the distinctions we often make between the inner and the outer, or between the spiritual and the material, or between believing and doing.
Rather than emphasizing the highly contemplative life of meditation and prayer, common among the Catholic orders, or focusing on right doctrine, as mainstream Protestants have tended to do, Anabaptists asked, “How can we be obedient to the gospel of Jesus Christ?”
Although medieval monasticism and Anabaptism held much in common, their different understandings of the Christian community, or the church, resulted in different spiritualities. Instead of an abstract or otherworldly mysticism, the Anabaptists emphasized the practice of obedience, active love, and the integration of faith and works. Their focus was not so much on cultivating a common spiritual life through contemplation, as it was practicing a life of prayer, peace, integrity, and humility in the context of radical communal social relationships. (page 30)
Anabaptists have an "understanding of discipleship as participation in the very nature of Jesus". This means "taking up your cross daily." (Aside: This may have some similarities to ideas about Pauline spirituality discussed in detail by Michael Gorman.)
This “spirituality of discipleship” assigned great importance to biblical teachings such as the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) and the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:13– 26), (page 50)
Can different traditions learn from one another? Driver is not sectarian or presenting Anabaptism as superior. Radicalism has its weaknesses.
John Howard Yoder... observed that radical reform movements tend to take on the mirror image of the very deficiencies that they have identified as in need of reform in the established churches.
For example, in a context where the church defined itself as a “sacramental communion,” the radicals tended to eliminate the sacramental dimension from their ecclesiology in the hopes of recovering a dynamic vision and practice more relevant to their historical setting. Thus, in their reaction against an “idolatrous” liturgy, sixteenth-century Anabaptist worship deprived itself of some of the rich symbolism through which God’s grace and love are communicated.
However, in this desire to respond more faithfully to the gospel, the Anabaptists have not been the only ones in the history of the church whose spirituality has been impoverished. Roland Bainton, a renowned twentieth-century church historian, once suggested that Martin Luther’s greatest tragedy consisted in not having Anabaptists nearby with whom to engage in meaningful dialogue. At the same time, in their reaction against Luther’s resolute emphasis on “justification by faith alone, without works” – and the almost inevitable lowering of ethical standards such an emphasis entailed – some Anabaptist groups emphasized obedience to the teachings of Christ so strongly, indeed almost exclusively, that they sometimes became victims of a sort of moral paralysis or legalism. This tension has lasted for many generations among some Anabaptist congregations.
In the sixteenth century, Christians generally held the conviction that there was only one truth, and that this, of necessity, was to be found in only one tradition. For that reason, the established churches – who believed that they were the custodians of this truth – persecuted and even executed those in the reform movements who dared to question their authority. Yet ironic as it may seem, once they had consolidated their existence and established their identity, these same reform movements tended to assume a similar attitude toward their adversaries. (pages 65-66)
Some of these tragic failures and dramatic hypocrisies are chronicled by Tom Holland in Dominion.
Unfortunately, Yoder himself and his Anabaptist denomination also experienced significant moral failures.
What is authentic Christian theology? It is not just an intellectual exercise but something that is lived out.
Authentic theology expresses truths that are lived out in practice, so that we may understand and live them more faithfully and communicate them more clearly in our missional witness. (page 71).
