Growing old with grace

I am 65 years old. I have struggled with my mental health much of my adult life. My wife, Robin, is 70 and has Parkinson’s disease. We are both retired from formal paid work. Some of our close friends are older or have greater health challenges than us. The reflections that follow are prompted by a desire to grow old with grace and to stimulate discussions on the topic with family and friends.

The communal dimension

Affluent individuals in the West think in individualistic terms. Perhaps, when it comes to ageing, they may think in a little more in terms of being part of a couple, and perhaps a nuclear family. However, ageing increases our dependence on others: a spouse, children, relatives, friends, neighbours, organisations, and governments. Even if, as individuals, we come to terms with the issues discussed below, that does not mean that our loved ones will. This complicates things further.

Accepting reality

We are all going to die. Unless we have a sudden and unexpected death, we are all going to get older. Gradually, our minds and bodies will decay. Ailments will increase. Physical, mental, and emotional energy will decline along with agility. It is tempting to live in denial that this will ever happen, or to deny that it is happening right now. The truth can be too scary, complicated, disappointing, or uncertain to accept. Even if we accept it, our loved ones may not. Even if we acknowledge the reality at an intellectual level, will we deal with it emotionally and at a practical level?

Declining energy

As we age, we have less physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual energy. We get tired more easily and our recovery time is longer. Today, I cannot function without a daily nap after lunch. I must carefully manage my limited energy. I cannot imagine doing many of the things I did a decade ago, let alone when I was young. 

Despite our declining energy, in retirement, we may have more time and freedom than ever before. We may have a new perspective on what really matters and want to use our freedom to avoid being sucked into the cares and anxieties of this world. What a blessing! The challenge is to make the most of our freedom with the energy we do have.

Some people retire from full-time employment and experience “a new lease on life.” Freed from a demanding work schedule and burdensome responsibilities, they have energy and enthusiasm for all sorts of activities.

On the positive side, what am I enjoying about this stage of life? How do I notice my energy changing? How am I adapting? Will I deal with practical and emotional issues while I still have the energy?

Practical dimensions

There is a whole range of financial, medical, legal, bureaucratic, transport, and housing dimensions to ageing. On the one hand, these complexities can come from individual affluence and living in a country with generous (by global standards) government support. On the other hand, navigating these complexities requires considerable time, energy, planning, technological savvy, and patience. It can be overwhelming. Furthermore, simply waiting until problems escalate to unsustainable levels risks creating unnecessary crises, placing burdens on others, and missing out on potential solutions. This is where accepting reality is important. At some point, we will have to stop driving, riding a bicycle, using ladders, writing books, travelling overseas, using stairs, and possibly living in our current house. Can we accept this? When do we think some of these things might happen? Do we have a plan for how we will adapt? When and how will we discuss this with family members?

Attitude

Facing reality is not easy. Our bodies are decaying. Opportunities and our influence on others are diminishing. Our legacy may be set. Not only are we changing, but so is the world around us. It is not what it used to be. Social and technological change is rapid, increasing, surprising, not necessarily for the better, and not easy to adapt to. Unlike during the bravado of youth, it is harder to deny our limitations and finitude. We now feel them in our bodies and brains. Loss rather than gain may be the norm. Funerals may outnumber weddings and births. Will we truly grieve our losses, whether it is the death of loved ones, a dream, or diminished mental capacity? Stages of grief may include denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance, not necessarily in a linear fashion.

Spiritual dimensions

The practical, intellectual, and emotional dimensions of ageing cannot be separated from the spiritual. My spiritual life can enable me to deal with the other challenges. Do I believe this life is all there is? Is it preparation for something better? Do I trust Jesus is walking next to me in this life stage, just as He has promised? As I experience weakness, is His grace sufficient for me? Am I looking back at past failures and disappointments with bitterness and shame? Or am I looking forward to being welcomed by Jesus into an eternal home? Do I have the hope of heaven, where there will be perfect love and justice, and no more death, tears, and pain?

A diversity of circumstances and experience

Everyone is different. Some people have excellent health and circumstances, and even when they are eighty years old, they don’t have to wrestle with some of the challenges I discuss here. Perhaps, they won’t have to for another decade. Some people die young. Some people have chronic health problems or disabilities their whole lives. Different family, social, or financial contexts can significantly affect the nature or extent of the challenges I discussed above. To illustrate the diversity I include a graph (at the end of this post) of the projected age of death for women in Australia who are 65 years old. It shows a large variation in life expectancy.

Some relevant books

Currently, Robin and I are reading three books. Each considers a different dimension of ageing.

"We need to talk about mum and dad" It is by the Australian comedian Jean Kittson and illustrated with cartoons by Patrick Cook. Although written for the children of ageing parents, it is helpful for anyone getting old. It discusses the complex family dynamics associated with ageing and how to navigate the many dimensions of the practical complexities of ageing. 

"Not Old, Not Young, Not Done: Following Jesus in Your 50s And 60s" by Christopher Ash.

"The Gift of Years: Growing Older Gracefully" by Joan Chittister. Although the author is a Benedictine nun, the book is intended for a broad audience. The book challenges our attitudes to ageing, but may be a bit idealistic for some of us.

Facing my pride and my prejudice

I used to think of Jane Austen as a writer of soppy romance novels, which have since been adapted into popular movies and TV series. I had watched some but had never read the novels. I thought of it as "chick lit" that has stood the test of time. Well, my pride and prejudice deceived me! In our extended family book club, we have been reading Pride and Prejudice. I now see that Austen uses romance as a backdrop for biting social satire,  insights into human folly, and the development of virtue.

This is illustrated in the following quotation, considered to be key to the novel. The heroine Elizabeth Bennett becomes aware of her own lack of virtue.

 "She grew absolutely ashamed of herself. Of neither Darcy nor Wickham could she think without feeling that she had been blind, partial, prejudiced, absurd. How despicably have I acted!" she cried; "I, who have prided myself on my discernment! I, who have valued myself on my abilities! who have often disdained the generous candour of my sister, and gratified my vanity in useless or blameable mistrust! How humiliating is this discovery! Yet, how just a humiliation! Had I been in love, I could not have been more wretchedly blind! But vanity, not love, has been my folly. Pleased with the preference of one, and offended by the neglect of the other, on the very beginning of our acquaintance, I have courted prepossession and ignorance, and driven reason away, where either were concerned. Till this moment I never knew myself."

        Pride and Prejudice, Chapter 36.

Austen's narrative beautifully illustrates two important truths: we are social beings, and money significantly influences many aspects of our lives. On one level, we may think these are fairly obvious truths. However, we need Austen to show their profundity, depth and subtlety. In Austen's time and context, these truths played out in specific ways that may seem alien to us. Nevertheless, they are still true today.

We are social beings

Being children of the Enlightenment and living in a culture of individualism, we love to believe that we are rugged independent individuals who can do as we please. An important and controversial question in sociology is the relationship between personal agency and social structure. How does the latter constrain the former?

The moral philosopher, Alasdair MacIntyre, wrote in After Virtue:

“We enter upon a stage which we did not design and we find ourselves part of an action that was not of our making. Each of us being a main character in his own drama plays subordinate parts in the dramas of others, and each drama constrains the others.”  

[This important book is discussed more below.]

We desire social relations and sometimes enjoy them. We may crave social affirmation in the form of status and acclaim. We fear social censure.

Pride and Prejudice is a story about social relations. All the characters, regardless of their wealth, seem to do is socialise. It is an endless stream of balls, dinners, visits, and parlour games.

People are judged based on their wealth, family heritage, property, dress, physical appearance, social etiquette, conversational skills, moral character, musical performance, ... What a burden! Furthermore, these judgements may be made hastily and with prejudice, particularly towards those of a different social class.

The moral failure of one family member may forever condemn others to social censure.

The picture is the British ten-pound note, featuring Jane Austen, issued in 2017, and the subject of some controversy. I find it ironic that Austen's image is now on currency, given that money features so significantly in her novels.

The power of money

In Pride and Prejudice, money defines social status and the suitability of potential marriage partners. The famous opening sentences of the novel capture this.

"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.

However little known the feelings or views of such a man may be on his first entering a neighbourhood, this truth is so well fixed in the minds of the surrounding families that he is considered as the rightful property of some one or other of their daughters."

However, the power of money goes beyond this. It shapes attitudes, anxieties, and action. The value of a person is equated with their monetary wealth. The potential future lack of money creates anxiety. Potential financial windfalls motivate action, including manipulation. Money is used to solve problems, such as Wickham eloping with the young Lydia Bennett.

Again, our context today is different from Pride and Prejudice. In marriage, money plays less of a role, but not an insignificant one. On the other hand, money shapes politics, religion, and education profoundly. Perhaps more than Austen's era. 

The Economist recently had a nice article, How Jane Austen revealed the economic basis of society: Some unacknowledged truths about money

John Dickson's podcast Undeceptions has a wonderful episode on Jane Austen. Interestingly, Dickson reveals that the title of his podcast, Undeceptions, was inspired by a C.S. Lewis essay on Jane Austen.

The episode includes a discussion of Alasdair MacIntyre and After Virtue.  For perspective, according to Wikipedia, this work 

"is one of the most important works of Anglophone moral and political philosophy in the 20th century.^[3] "

In it, MacIntyre pays homage to Jane Austen as providing the narrative form needed to resolve the modern problems that he identifies, such as morality being rooted in emotivism and subjectivity.

“C.S. Lewis saw in her an essentially Christian writer. It is her uniting of Christian and Aristotelian themes in a determinate social context that makes Jane Austen the last great effective imaginative voice of the tradition of thought about, and practice of, the virtues which I have tried to identify.”

Finally, Why Cornel West loves Jane Austen 

"Cornel West views "Sistah Jane" as a radical revisionary whose promotion of courageous truth-speaking amid a tragicomic theater of humanity challenges us to change society by changing ourselves, by cultivating simple but now revolutionary virtues." 

I thank my daughter for bringing to my attention that Cornel West is an Austen fan.

The centrality of marginality to Christian theology and life

This month at the theology reading group, we are discussing Marginality: The Key to Multicultural Theology by Jung Young Lee.

How do we make sense of our life experience in terms of theology? How do we make sense of theology in terms of our life experience? Given our humanity (finitude and egoism), it is impossible to completely separate our theology and our experience. Will they enrich or distort one another? Previously, I have written about the challenges of contextual theology.

Jung Young Lee was born in North Korea in 1935, escaped to South Korea during the Korean War, and immigrated to the USA as an undergraduate student. He then worked as a librarian, obtained a Ph.D., taught in a secular university, became a minister in the United Methodist Church, was active in its Korean-American congregations, and became a Professor of Systematic Theology at Drew University. Over the years, he experienced racism, prejudice, and stereotyping as an Asian-American.  Not feeling he belonged in the USA, he returned to South Korea at one point with the intention of staying. However, he discovered that he felt he no longer belonged there either.

Lee makes sense of his life through three lenses: historical, sociological, and theological. He recounts the historical experience of immigrants to the USA from Japan, Korea, and China, beginning in the nineteenth century. It is a sad and disturbing history of exploitation, discrimination, and humiliation. He discusses the sociological concept of marginality that was introduced to describe the "integration" of immigrants into the American "melting pot." He contests some of these definitions as they are developed by those in the centre and assume that being on the margins is bad and that the marginalised should move towards the centre. The centre is characterised by a concern with "wealth, power, and glory." (page 31)

"Immigration is the most vivid and profound symbol of marginality for us." (page 110).

Lee claims that "Theology is autobiographical so I reflect on my praxis and context." (page 33).

Lee discusses how marginality is central to the Biblical narrative. The Tower of Babel "was the symbol of centralisation" (p. 110). 

Lee suggests that in Old Testament narratives there are three acts (p,111). 

1. God's call to be a marginal people

2. Faith

3. "The promise which includes  receiving land, becoming a powerful nation, and making a great name (Genesis 12:1-9)."

"These three acts are inseparable. The first and third acts seem to contradict one another, but they are connected in the second act. The order of these acts cannot be reversed.... Tragedies in the history of Judaism and Christianity were due to the reversal this order... The coexistence of both marginality (the first act) and centrality (the third act) is possible in faith (the second act), the connecting principle..."

There is a dialectic. It is both/and rather than either/or.

God called Moses from his marginal status to lead the Israelite slaves out of Egypt. They wandered in the wilderness for forty years. Jesus was born in a stable, the son of a teenage unwed woman, and grew up in Galilee. In the wilderness, he resisted the temptation to embrace "wealth, power, and honour." He was scorned by the centre: the local religious and political leaders. The focus of his ministry was on the marginalised: the poor, sick, ritually unclean, hungry, lame, beggars, prostitutes, and tax collectors.  Jesus' death on the cross was the ultimate symbol of marginalisation. His disciples were not drawn from the social, political, or religious elites.

Humility, service, and love are the dominant characteristics Jesus said his followers should have. The early church did this and lived on the margins. Yet, following Constantine and the rise of Christendom, the church embraced centrality and scorned marginality. It was characterised by wealth, honour, and power. Today, the church, in all its diverse forms, still aspires to centrality. It is hierarchical, bureaucratic, and exclusive. Dogma does not recognise multiple shades of grey. (p. 125) "Centralism is the cardinal sin that destroys the authentic church." (p.142)

Lee presents a radical alternative vision for the church, including for seminaries. He argues that cell groups should be the core structural element of the church. Structures should be characterised by flexibility, local autonomy, and informality.

I have sympathy for his proposals, but sometimes I find he is idealistic and overly optimistic. Some of his proposals may work for a marginalised community such as Korean-Americans (who tend to be disciplined, well-organised, and highly educated). However, for groups of people such as the homeless and those with addictions or traumatic backgrounds, it is extremely challenging for them to develop structures and leaders. Such challenges are helpfully described in an earlier post by my wife, Robin.

On a personal level, I found the book challenging and discomforting. I am a child of the centre, in terms of family background, race, education, wealth, social status, and profession. Most of my life, I have been involved in churches and ministries that value and focus on centrality and marginality. This has not involved a blatant seeking after wealth, power, and honour. It has been much more subtle and subconscious, reflecting the surrounding culture and background of the participants and leaders. Too often I have been attracted to the centre and seduced by it. Only over the last fifteen years, I have a moved to a more marginal outlook and focus, stimulated by experiences in the Majority World. Yet the pull back to the centre is there day after day, particularly towards comfort, safety, and predictability.

The orientation and main messages of the book are largely not new to me. Nevertheless, it is a message I need to keep hearing. Lee's description of the immigrant experience, both his own and his historical predecessors, increased my imagination and empathy towards the immigrants I interact with. He gives seven characteristics of the experience of marginality: rejection, humiliation, alienation, loneliness, nothingness, allness, and a vision of new life.

The cost and fruit of advocacy for the marginalised

In his wonderful book, In the Midst of Much-Doing, Charles Ringma recounts his involvement with the marginalised in Brisbane during the 1970s.

To give an example from our ministry with troubled youth, drug addicts, and men and women in prostitution, we had no difficulty gaining support from churches, the general community, or the business world in our counselling work, drug prevention programs, rehabilitation, and training for meaningful employment. However, we were living in a city with a corrupt police drug squad, and we knew many people who had their doors bashed down at 5 am, been dragged out of bed, herded into a room, and guarded while other police searched the place and “found” guns, money, and loads of drugs, leading to an impressive arrest for the police force. Yet in many cases, the police had planted the drugs, as they were some of the key drug dealers in the community. Each police “success” put people we knew behind bars for several decades. As we learned of these unjust practices, we began to support our friends with legal help. 

But as soon as we raised the issue of police corruption, the churches and community sent us a clear message: heal, but don’t advocate; evangelize, but don’t work for justice; counsel people, but don’t engage political issues. In other words, we should try to “save people from their personal sins,” but we shouldn’t engage their oppression and victimization.

I worked for twenty years with drug addicts, men and women in prostitution, and delinquent youth. In this journey, I learned a most painful lesson. In a nutshell, the church, community-based organizations, and even big business were all willing to support a ministry of drug counselling, rehabilitation, prevention, prison work, and vocational training so that those who had been scarred by drugs could regain a more productive life. Even the secular businesses that supported us did not mind when people became Christians. But over time, it became apparent that the police drug-squad in our city of Brisbane were falsely arresting street people and under-reporting drug seizures. Thus, the police were corrupt and acting as drug pushers. 

We felt that we had to do something, and so our first move was to get assistance from lawyers, who helped falsely accused street people get off or receive lighter sentences. Our second move was to see the government minister responsible for the police and inform him of what we knew. He said he would look into the matter — and then did nothing. 

Some time later, we went to see the Premier of our state, who was a professed Christian. He also said he would look into it, but nothing happened. Months went by, and the false arrests and the sale of illegal drugs by the police continued unabated. For our final move (after praying a lot), we went to the media to expose what was happening. All hell broke loose. The police denied everything. The Premier publicly condemned us as communists. The churches withdrew all their financial support. On our knees, we were all but destroyed. 

Advocacy comes at a price.

But a seed was sown, and others sowed seeds. And eventually, several years later, a Commission of Inquiry into police corruption was set up, headed up by Tony Fitzgerald, QC. In light of the Commission findings, numerous police, four ministers of the government, and the Police Commissioner were found guilty and imprisoned, and the Premier was charged for perjury but was acquitted due to a hung jury. 

In telling this event, I am practically illustrating what the Lausanne documents call us to do. As the Manila Manifesto (1989) states, “we must demonstrate God’s love visibly by caring for those who are deprived of justice,” and our Christian service “demands the denunciation of all injustice and oppression.”

This shows the cost of advocacy for the marginalised. But, it also shows the fruit. Seeds can be sown. Not only did many of the marginalised benefit. Today, those of us living in Brisbane, benefit from not having corrupt police, unjust courts, or government by cronyism. 

The battle for succession: from King David's sons to 21st-century American evangelicalism

 At church we have just started a sermon and study series on the book of 1 Kings in the Old Testament. To get the big picture of a book of the Bible I find it helpful to watch (several times) a short video produced by The Bible Project and to print out the associated poster.

1 Kings begins with intrigue and scheming as there is a battle between two of David's sons, Adonijah and Solomon, and their associated entourages, to receive the blessing of their ailing father to be King. The Bible gives a "warts and all" description of these flawed humans who often act in morally dubious ways, while claiming they are doing what YHWH wants. The ends justify the means. Naked selfish ambition will go to extreme ends to gain and maintain power. It is all about money, sex, and power. This is not just ancient Israel, but also the world we live in today. 

The endless scheming and drama resonate with the popular TV series, Succession, which I have not watched. But, it is not just in the modern pagan world of global corporations that one sees such dramas. I thought of a recent article in Vanity Fair. The article features two sons who succeeded their fathers to lead large Christian organisations in the USA, and now draw annual salaries of about $1 M per year.

INSIDE JERRY FALWELL JR.’S UNLIKELY RISE AND PRECIPITOUS FALL AT LIBERTY UNIVERSITY

Jerry Falwell Jr. was the Trump-anointing dark prince of the Christian right. Then a sex scandal rocked his marriage and ended his lucrative stewardship of the evangelical education empire founded by his father. In a series of exclusive interviews, Falwell—accompanied by his wife, Becki—describes the events that led to his ouster, their fallout, and why he’s finally ready to admit he never had much use for his father’s church anyway.

The article contains the following anecdote.

Jerry also suspected that Franklin Graham, son of the late Billy Graham, used the scandal to expand the Graham family’s influence over Liberty. Franklin Graham’s son Will was named vice chairman of Liberty’s board... Jerry said Franklin Graham had also once told him that he wanted to start a Billy Graham University, but it didn’t get off the ground. In September 2020, Jerry and Franklin got into an argument over who should get credit for Liberty’s success. “I said, ‘My dad built the foundation, but I built the house. And Franklin got furious. He said, ‘You didn’t build it!’ You should have heard the jealousy in Franklin’s voice,” Jerry recalled. According to Jerry, Franklin Graham told him his future in the Christian world is over. “He said, ‘You’ll never be anything in evangelical circles again.’ ” Graham, through a spokesperson, declined to comment.

Money, sex, and power. Just like in 1 Kings. Jesus, God's anointed eternal King is so different. So should his servants be.

How might Christians respond to poverty?

 On the one hand, the world has never been so wealthy and prosperous as it is today. On the other hand, it has never been so unequal. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Billions live on a few dollars per day. The covid-19 pandemic has made this fragile existence even more tenuous and has pushed hundreds of millions more into poverty. Poverty is not just material but also involves limited access to education, health, social networks, and political representation. There are also psychological and spiritual dimensions to poverty.

Addressing global poverty has become a massive billion-dollar "industry", for better or worse, involving governments, philanthropists, NGOs, universities, and researchers. Yet, the effectiveness of this industry in alleviating poverty is contentious.  

The Bible, from beginning to end, says a lot about poverty, wealth, inequality, injustice, and caring for the marginalised. Hence, addressing these issues should be central to the mission of the global church. But, this is a complex issue as it involves theological, political, economic, social, and cultural dimensions. 

A helpful place to begin is the book, When Helping Hurts: How to Alleviate Poverty Without Hurting the Poor and Yourself, by Brian Fikkert and Steve Corbett. They state

one of the biggest problems in many poverty-alleviation efforts is that their design and implementation exacerbates the poverty of being of the economically rich—their god-complexes—and the poverty of being of the economically poor—their feelings of inferiority and shame.

There is also an excellent small group guide with videos that my wife and I have used with a church small group.

For those who want to go deeper, either because they are academically oriented or are practitioners, there is a "textbook".

Walking with the Poor: Principles and Practices of Transformational Development by Bryant L. Myers

Myers worked for World Vision for many years and now teaches at Fuller Seminary. It is comprehensive, balanced, easy to read, and has helpful diagrams. There are many things I like about the book.

Integral mission

"The Christian message is an embodied message, carried by living witnesses." Word, deed, and sign cannot be separated. Poverty alleviation and gospel proclamation are both acts of love that go together. Transformational development has spiritual, relational, and material dimensions. It is central to the Kingdom of God.

Bringing together theology, social science, and activism

Activism and programs need to be informed by both social sciences and by theology. Activism receives motivation and direction from theology, being informed by a Biblical worldview.  That provides a framework to understand who humans are, how they act, and how they change. The themes of creation, fall, incarnation, redemption, and re-creation are central. 

Poverty occurs in a social context. A community is "disturbed" by any outside intervention or internal initiative that aims to reduce poverty. Social sciences can be useful in understanding social structures and dynamics, including designing and evaluating the impact of any program.

A compact overview of state-of-the-art thinking and practice on development

There is a huge academic literature on development, from both Christian and secular, Western and Majority World perspectives. 

Myers provides a succinct introduction to the ideas of Jeffrey Sachs, William Easterly, Paul Collier, Banerjee and Duflo, Muhammad Yunus, Amartya Sen, ...

There are methods for planning, implementing, monitoring, and evaluation of projects. These include The Logical Framework (logframe), Participatory Learning and Action, Appreciative Inquiry, and Positive Deviance. They are all introduced and critically evaluated.

Sensitive to culture and context

Most poverty alleviation programs are led and funded by WWWs (Wealthy White Westerners) but implemented in Majority World contexts that are not WEIRD (Western Educated Industrialised Rich Democratic). Given the hubris that too often goes with money, power, and education (a god-complex) it is hardly surprising that many programs fail, particularly in the long term, because of a lack of understanding and sensitivity to local culture such as social structures, values, methods of communication, ...

The modern Western worldview presupposes dichotomies between the spiritual and material. The figure below shows pairings of categories, such as religion and science, faith and reason. These pairs are assumed to be in conflict or completely independent of one another. These dichotomies are often presupposed by Western Christians. But, they are not part of a Biblical worldview.

Postmodernism does not accept these dichotomies, and rightly points out they are naive. For example, faith and reason can never be separated, either for a Christian or an atheist. Everyone starts with some presuppositions. Rationality takes place in the context of a particular tradition, as emphasised by Alisdair MacIntyre.

Myers draws on ideas from the anthropologist, Paul Hiebert, who contrasts modern and traditional worldviews, illustrated below. A key idea is that of the "excluded middle" in the modern worldview: there is no room for forces and phenomena that bridge the spiritual and seen world. 

This presents a problem for development initiatives in communities with a traditional worldview; this excluded middle that may be seen to determine health, prosperity, natural disasters, and conflicts. Hence, a community will not be receptive to technical "solutions" that are presented by Westerners.

Treats the poor with dignity  

The poor and non-poor are all made in the image of God. They are of equal value in God's eyes. Hence, the poor should be valued, respected, celebrated, enjoyed, empowered, and listened to. 

Myers reviews social science research that shows that the poor actually know a lot more than they are often given credit for. They are incredibly resilient. It is a miracle how they manage to survive and persevere. Myers describes the work of the Peruvian economist, Hernando de Soto who "demonstrated the vitality, creativity, and entrepreneurial activity of Peru's urban poor." However, this positive energy is significantly constrained because they are required to operate in the informal (underground) economy which means they do not have protections from the rule of law or the property titles that others use to access capital. 

Discussion of complexity theory and emergence

Communities are composed of many interacting units (individuals, families, businesses, churches, ...) that are embedded in an environment (e.g. a city and the global economy). For such complex systems, it is hard to predict how they will behave, including in response to a "perturbation". Hence, the concept of emergence and ideas from complexity theory can provide some insight into development.

Principles are relevant to other Majority World issues

The focus of the book is on poverty alleviation, particularly extreme poverty in the Majority World. However, most of the principles (theological and social scientific) and practices are relevant to any initiative of a Christian organisation that aims to have a transformative influence in a community. Part of my interest in the book is because it addresses many issues that we face in the IFES Logos and Cosmos Initiative.

If you want to know more about the book you can download the Table of Contents and Chapter 1. The latter provides a nice overview of the book, introducing some of the key ideas, and describing how it came to be written.

Deep Life

Reflecting on trends in society, churches, and universities, a significant challenge and concern is the accelerating rush to superficiality. Constant electronic connectivity through email, texting, and social media promotes urgency, immediacy, oversimplification, fads, and superficiality. Noise, hurry, and crowds push out quietness, stillness, and solitude. The nuance associated with deep reflection is lost and replaced with a Twitter storm of celebrity, "spin", and conspiracy theories. Money, marketing, management, and metrics dominate discussion and decisions.

On the one hand, this reflects human nature. On the other hand, to see the problem is getting a lot worse consider history, whether that of the church or universities. What individuals, institutions, and work (scholarship, art, music, literature) have had a lasting positive influence? 

Who do I admire and respect? I suggest that two essential features are the depth of what was produced and the long and sustained effort (free from distractions) that was required to produce it. The depth may be in insight, creativity, scholarship, personal integrity, engagement, understanding, or relationships. I see this depth in people such as Isaac Newton, James Clerk Maxwell, Augustine, Calvin, Karl Barth, Mother Teresa, Einstein, John Stott,...

The figure above shows how some trees have root systems that have a depth greater than their height. The image is from here.

Now I consider how this issue of depth is receiving increasing attention from a range of authors in quite different contexts: business, the knowledge economy, social commentators, universities, and churches.

In the context of the modern information economy the need to turn from "shallow work" to "deep work" has been carefully argued by Cal Newport, a computer science professor, in his 2016 book, Deep Work:

"Shallow work is non-cognitive, logistical or minor duties, often performed while distracted. These efforts require little cognitive effort, tend to create little value, and are usually easy to replicate." Examples include replying to emails, browsing websites, looking at social media, filling in forms, and attending meetings.

"Deep work is the ability to focus without distraction on a cognitively demanding task. These efforts create new value, improve your skill, and are hard to replicate.”

This ties in with Malcolm Gladwell's argument that the 10,000-hour rule is one key ingredient for professional success.

In a different vein, in The Road to Character, The New York Times columnist David Brooks confesses, “I was born with a natural disposition towards shallowness.” He recounts his efforts to find a way out of shallow punditry and to cultivate personal character, particularly to move beyond "resume virtues", beloved by the modern world, and to move towards "eulogy virtues" such as humility, bravery, and kindness. The book is based on a course that Brooks taught three times at Yale University.

Piling higher

Some of the language that follows may offend some. But consider what the Apostle Paul said in the following verses. Interestingly, most English translations are sanitised. Here are renditions from The Message.

Why don’t these agitators, obsessive as they are about circumcision, go all the way and castrate themselves! (Galatians 5:12)

Compared to the high privilege of knowing Christ Jesus as my Master, firsthand, everything I once thought I had going for me is insignificant—dog dung. (Philippians 3:8)

Christian Smith is a distinguished sociologist who has done seminal work in the sociology of religion including adolescent spirituality, racism, and American evangelicalism. (Perhaps I particularly like him because he argues that critical realism and emergence are important in the philosophy of the social sciences). 

Of relevance to this post is that in 2018 Smith published an excellent (but depressing) article, "Higher Education is Drowning in BS: And it’s mortally corrosive to society" in The Chronicle of Higher Education.

 

Harry Frankfurt, a distinguished philosopher at Princeton University, wrote  On BS  that became a New York Times bestseller. According to Wikipedia,

Frankfurt determines that bullshit is speech intended to persuade without regard for truth. The liar cares about the truth and attempts to hide it; the bullshitter doesn't care if what he or she says is true or false, but cares only whether the listener is persuaded.

Anthropologist David Graeber refers to Frankfurt's book in his book Bullshit Jobs, which argues that today, half of the jobs are pointless and are psychologically destructive.

Now I turn to the church in the West. It is embedded in this culture and prone to fads, superficiality, and a focus on the four M's: money, marketing, management, and metrics. In his book, Ordinary: Sustainable Faith in a Radical, Restless World, Michael S. Horton expresses concern about the preoccupation in the USA church with the "next-big-thing" that promises radical transformation, and advocates instead "a renewed appreciation of the commonplace."

The pandemic has made this even more urgent and challenging because the world (including everyday life, work, ministry) has become even more complex, unpredictable, and fragile.

Deep Life in the Bible

The Bible addresses the issue of superficiality versus depth, particularly with regard to integrity and relationships. For example, in Isaiah 58, the Israelites complain to God.

"Why have we fasted and you see it not?. Why have we humbled ourselves, and you take no knowledge of it?"

God responds that their worship is actually superficial and lacks integrity.

Behold, in the day of your fast you seek your own pleasure,

    and oppress all your workers.

4 

Behold, you fast only to quarrel and to fight

    and to hit with a wicked fist.

Fasting like yours this day

    will not make your voice to be heard on high.

5 

Is such the fast that I choose,

    a day for a person to humble himself?

Is it to bow down his head like a reed,

    and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him?

Will you call this a fast,

    and a day acceptable to the Lord?  

“Is not this the fast that I choose:

  to loose the bonds of wickedness,
    to undo the straps of the yoke,
to let the oppressed go free,
    and to break every yoke?
Is it not to share your bread with the hungry
    and bring the homeless poor into your house;
when you see the naked, to cover him,
    and not to hide yourself from your own flesh?

Matthew 13 recounts Jesus telling the parable of the sower, which describes different responses to Jesus' teaching (the Word).

“A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop—a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown.

Jesus' condemned the Pharisees, the religious elite of his day, for their hypocrisy, particularly their concern with outward appearances rather than a deep integrity based on a pure heart. For example, in Luke 11 Jesus says,

“Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness. You foolish people! Did not the one who made the outside make the inside also? But now as for what is inside you—be generous to the poor, and everything will be clean for you."

We don't need just Deep Work, we also need Deep Integrity, Deep Relationships, and Deep Spirituality. I suggest they are often interrelated. Deep Work is concerned with "cognitively demanding tasks" but we also need to set aside time to focus on tasks that are morally, relationally, or spiritually demanding. In different words, this is about Formacion (spiritual formation and discipleship).

Christian leaders in a smartphone world

Is there depth to how I follow Jesus with my heart, hands, and mind? This involves movement and engagement in horizontal, vertical, and inward directions. Is there depth in my relationships: with God, with family, with co-workers, with students, and with supporters?

A deep understanding is required of God's Word, the world, ourselves, our context, and the university. Such understanding can only come with sustained periods of thinking, reading, writing, learning, listening, praying,... 

How can we move in this direction? It is not easy because we are all constantly being pushed in the wrong direction: noise, superficiality, rush, distraction, ... 

Although it is not possible to cut out all the noise and distractions, they can be reduced with planning, organisation, and discipline, from the individual to the institutional level. Many of the practical suggestions that Cal Newport makes about Deep Work are relevant to other areas of life. His suggestions include quitting social media, digital minimalism, and rigorous scheduling of time for deep life.

Institutions are a means to an end, not an end in themselves. As they grow and age they have a natural tendency to lose the passion, commitment, innovation, outward orientation, and flexibility of their founders. Instead, they tend to become self-focused, bureaucratic, inflexible and centred around the careers and interests of their management. 

Institutions and their leaders can move in the right direction by hiring and promoting people with real depth, implementing policies and procedures that shift the emphasis away from the four Ms, and create space for deep life, including by shifting conversations towards deep work, deep integrity, deep relationships, and deep spirituality. 

Following Jesus the Radical

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).

Should a follower of Jesus pay taxes to an oppressive government?

``Giving to God and Caesar— the Complicated End of Dualism'' is the title of Chapter 4 of  Money Matters: Faith, Life, and Wealth by R. Paul Stevens and Clive Lim. It begins with the following quotation.

“Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and unto God that which is God’s.”

In my opinion, the entire problem of life in contemporary culture can be defined as the challenge to understand that saying of Jesus. 

Jacob Needleman

The relevant passage is from Matthew 22

17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the poll-tax to Caesar or not?’ 18 But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, ‘You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19 Show me the coin used for paying the tax.’ They brought him a denarius, 20 and he asked them, ‘Whose image is this? And whose inscription?’ 21 ‘Caesar’s,’ they replied. Then he said to them, ‘So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.’

Stevens and Lim claim (page 45) 

In this extraordinary incident Jesus asserted that money can have a holy purpose. He fulfilled the desire to meet a divine purpose and this-worldly obligations at the same time. And teasingly, he left open the question of what “giving to God” means.

I fail to see this. In The Gospel of Matthew: A socio-rhetorical commentary, Craig Keener suggests that this passage may be descriptive not prescriptive. It is mostly showing how great Jesus is. He can easily put the Pharisees in their place.

I also wonder if this story should be read and interpreted in conjunction with the following passage from Matthew 17. 

 24 After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?” 25 “Yes, he does,” he replied. When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own children or from others?” 26 “From others,” Peter answered. “Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him. 27 “But so that we may not cause offense, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”

Keener (p. 445) states that the main points of this passage are the following.

Jesus cares about his disciples' social obligations.

The disciples need to be ready to surrender their privileges and rights for the sake of the gospel.

Jesus supplies needs like these as well as other needs

Putting both these interactions about money and taxes together, I would say they highlight how money is tied up with power and questions of allegiance, honour, and authority. People play these silly games with money.  Let people play their silly games. Play along. Instead, followers of Jesus should focus on his kingdom.

Much of the chapter is arguing against the dualism of the sacred-secular divide. The authors' state (p.47-8) that

by the fifteenth century only the monk, nun, and priest were regarded as having a calling. Karl Barth’s summary is apt: “According to the view prevalent at the height of the Middle Ages [secular work] only existed to free for the work of their profession those who were totally and exclusively occupied in rendering true obedience for the salvation of each and all.” 

[“Vocation,” in Church Dogmatics, III/4 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1961), 601]

This is not far from the contemporary idea that business people in the church are “walking checkbooks” needed to support the pastor. But what they do to make this money is not sacred. So what happened?

The Reformation promoted some of the problems of duality, particularly because it led to a dis-enchantment of much of life.

 With the disenchantment of work and exchange, money makes rational calculation and accounting possible but it does this by re-reducing everything to “mere quantities.” This is something that the German social philosopher Georg Simmel elaborated in his massive volume. So, as is said of some merchants, they know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

 In summary, the dualism that persists globally among Christian people has multiple sources: the persistence of Old Testament patterns, the Greek philosophical influence, the decline of the holiness of everyday life following the Protestant Reformation, and the influence of other faiths and philosophies.

 So how then do we reconcile both sides of the coin, God and Caesar? How can we give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s? This can happen only with a thoroughgoing integration of faith and life. R. T. France, commenting on Matthew 22:15–22, suggests that “this is not the rigid division of life into the ‘sacred’ and the ‘secular’, but rather a recognition that the ‘secular’ finds its proper place within the overriding claim of the ‘sacred’.”

Where did money come from? Does it matter?

Does the historical origin of an idea, method, or system matter when considering how to respond to it?

Modern psychology began with Freud, whose personal life, ideas, and methods have received robust critiques. Does that mean modern psychology is flawed?

The administrative structures of many nations were built by colonialists. How is that relevant?

If something has Christian origins does that mean it is necessarily good? 

``Holy Money—A Brief History and Why It is So Complicated to Handle,'' is the title of Chapter 3 of  Money Matters: Faith, Life, and Wealth by R. Paul Stevens and Clive Lim.

They consider recent scholarship that argues that the origin of money was not the barter system but actually religion, Babylonian and Jewish, .. 

Caroline Humphrey’s definitive anthropological work on barter concludes. “No example of a barter economy, pure and simple, has ever being described, let alone the emergence from it of money; all available ethnography suggests that there never has been such a thing.”

The authors state (p. 40)

Money, since its beginning, has been a spiritual matter and was created within the temple for the sacred management of the temple. The earliest use of money was within a canopy of sacredness to moderate the wealth of the temple and to justly distribute goods among the residents of the city.

 Thus, "money has a soul". They continue.

Like all the “principalities and powers” named in the Bible (Eph. 6:12), money has a dark spiritual side. As we saw in the temple context, money demands devotion, devotion that should be rendered to God himself.

On the one hand, I found this chapter interesting.  My wife less so. But, I remain to be convinced that the issue of the origin of money is that crucial to developing a Christian response. 

In ancient life, whether Jewish, African, South Asian, or Babylonian, everything had a religious dimension, and much of life (food, family, politics, economics, warfare,...) was centred around temples. Some was pagan and evil. Some was good and promoted human flourishing. That is a long way from the world that the readers of this book live in.

Some, or even many readers, may find the chapter heavy going, and the momentum and interest build by the first two chapters may wane.

Does our life experience shape our views on money and material wealth?

Money and material wealth are a big issue that society and churches, particularly in the Western world, need to grapple with. This is a significant issue for me personally as from a global perspective my wife and I are in the top one to ten percent, as are many of our friends in Australia and the USA. Many of our friends in the Majority World are in the majority, i.e. the lower 80 percent!

It is amazing how much Jesus talked about money. He talked about it as much as heaven and certainly more than about sex! Yet, there is not much open and honest discussion about the issue in churches, except for fundraising for (mostly) local budgets. As an aside, I acknowledge that in churches that promote Prosperity Theology (which I think is very dubious) money is talked about a lot.

I was very happy that the book for next month to be discussed in the theology reading group is Money Matters: Faith, Life, and Wealth by R. Paul Stevens and Clive Lim. I asked my wife to read it with me since I think it is so important for us.

In the first two chapters, each of the authors introduces themselves, describing their Christian journey, particularly as it relates to money. I am not normally a fan of such introductions. Sometimes they are a prelude to a book that largely reflects views that are solely shaped by the author's own experiences. Experience is used to interpret Scripture, rather than Scripture used to interpret experience. But, these stories are not just fascinating, honest, and vulnerable. They illustrate an important point.  We need to consider our own stories when we consider a Christian perspective on money and wealth. The two stories are also interesting because they are quite different: one is from the East and one from the West. One grew up in a Christian family and the other did not. Moreover, one grew up in a very poor family and eventually became quite wealthy. The other grew up quite wealthy and through following Jesus ended up with little money (by affluent Western standards). Why does this matter? Before telling his own story, Stevens states

Clive and I are telling our money stories because our attitude toward money is formed through many influences, not least our family education, our experience growing up and the influence of our culture. Sometimes the teaching of the church on money, whenever it happens, usually pales in significance before the overwhelming influence of the media, the culture and the family in which we grew up. There is precious little church teaching on the subject even though the Bible is chock full of it (except of course the teaching to give one tenth to the church). But we also saw in Clive’s story how our experience with money reveals a lot about ourselves. We get to know ourselves partly through our handling of money. What was also evident as Clive told his story is this: our relationship with God is partially shaped by our handling of money. And the reverse is also true: our faith influences our approach to money, especially our view of the kingdom of God.

Perhaps these reflections on the influence of our life experiences is also key to understanding our views on other issues such as sex, family life, church, and politics. Our experiences, and those of others, are influential, perhaps beyond more than we would like to acknowledge, but they should not be taken to be determinative.

Hopefully, this post will be the first of several that engage with separate chapters of the book. 

Other books I am keen to read and be in dialogue with include 

Missions as Money: Affluence as a Missionary Problem by Jonathon Bonk.

WHEN MONEY GOES ON MISSION: FUNDRAISING AND GIVING IN THE 21ST CENTURY Rob Martin

The offence and challenge to Christian's of a simple life-style.

 Last Christmas, I read a biography, Basic Christian: The Inside Story of John Stott, by Roger Steer. I found it helpful, encouraging and challenging. Stott was someone who loved Jesus, loved the Bible, was a humble leader of integrity, and had a particular concern for the Majority World.

One small piece that stood out is the paragraph below concerning the 1974 Lausanne Congress on World Evangelisation. The meeting issued a Covenant, which was largely written by John Stott. An excellent exposition of the Covenant is in a book by Stott, and subsequently updated by Chris Wright, Christian Mission in the Modern World.

The Covenant covers 15 topics with a paragraph on each. There is much that the 2,300 leaders from 150 countries could have disagreed about. However, the most contentious sentence was the following.

Those of us who live in affluent circumstances accept our duty to develop a simple life-style in order to contribute more generously to both relief and evangelism.

This led to a consultation in 1980 which produced a detailed paper, some of which is here.

Christendom was not very Christian

Tom Holland presents a fascinating story of how in the past two thousand years Christianity shaped Western society in his recent book Dominion: The Making of the Western Mind. This month in the theology reading group, we are discussing the second section, Christendom, which covers 754 to 1420 AD.

The first section, Antiquity, traces how Christ's death on the cross, full of suffering and humiliation, shaped what Christians believed and how they lived. This was radical and counter-cultural, and paradoxically increased the power and influence of the church. 

However, reviewing the rise of Christendom there is no room for Christians to feel pride or triumphalism. Rather, we should feel shame and embarrassment at the failure of church leaders and members, particularly in relation to power, wealth, violence, division, pride, and self-righteousness. Church leaders were quick to align themselves with rich and powerful rulers and support violence, often from unruly mobs, as a means to expand their territorial influence and to deal with perceived heresy.

These areas are intertwined and represent clear violations of the teachings of Jesus and Paul. It is worth considering each of these in turn. I quote a few representative texts but claim that these are central themes of the whole New Testament.

Power 

In Matthew 20:25-28, Jesus warns the disciples.

Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Henry Nouwen comments

One of the greatest ironies of the history of Christianity is that its leaders constantly gave in to the temptation of power—political power, military power, economic power, or moral and spiritual power—even though they continued to speak in the name of Jesus, who did not cling to his divine power but emptied himself and became as we are [Philippians 2:5-11]. 

Wealth 

You cannot serve God and money (Matthew 6:24). Caring for the poor and needy is the same as caring for Jesus (Matthew 25). Paul warns Timothy about false teachers (1 Timothy 6:3-10).

Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

Violence

Genesis 6 describes how God was grieved that the earth was full of violence. In Matthew 6 Jesus says "turn the other cheek" and

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous."

Do not respond to evil with evil (Romans 12:17-21).

Division

Jesus' followers are to aim to live in peace with one another. Their unity is to be a sign that Jesus is from God.

Pride and self-righteousness

Followers of Jesus are not to be the "first to cast the stone" or to look at the speck of sawdust in their brother's eye when there is a plank in their own. Surely, this does not just relate to lifestyle but also to hairsplitting about doctrine.

On that note, it is easy to pass judgement on these past leaders and church members who joined violent mobs. Why didn't they read their Bibles? Well, it was not quite so simple. Many were illiterate. Even if they were there was no mass publication. There was no Bible in their own language. The church liturgy was in Latin.

An intriguing example of the moral complexities church leaders faced was the relationship between the priest Alcuin and Charlemagne, the King of the Franks who became the Roman emperor. The example of King David was used by Charlemagne when in 782 he ordered the beheading of 4500 prisoners in a single day. He became a sponsor, friend, and student of Alcuin, who was able to convince the warrior king to stop his practice of forcing pagans to convert at sword point. Alcuin pointed out "faith rises from the will not an act of compulsion.''.

This period of church history was not all bad. There were rays of hope. Alcuin laid foundations for literacy and education, that fully blossomed into the first universities, Bologna and Paris. The notion of equality of all humans before God led to that of human rights and equality before the law. There was also the seeds of modern science being sown in universities.

Although in the Western world today church leaders are rarely involved in physical violence, that does not mean that there is not verbal and relational violence, both at the individual and corporate level. Furthermore, the allure of power, money, pride, and self-righteousness seems rampant. May we repent and sit at Jesus' feet and be challenged to live as he wishes us to live.