See below for the first post in this three-part series of lecture notes based on John Perkins' book, With Justice For All. The 3Rs that guide our community here. From my seminary course I am teaching this semester in community based ministry, through www.ptstulsa.edu.
The Vision and Realities of
Reconciliation, Part Two
Notes on Perkins Chapters 12 and 13
In the opening story in these
chapters, Perkins describes an event where he met a white man after a talk, an
encounter that happened because the man stayed behind in a faculty lounge when
all other white faculty members had to leave to go to class; he did not want
Perkins to think that they were boycotting him because of his race. From that
moment of empathy, of sensitivity to the feelings of another different from
himself, a relationship was built. How do we and can we use our resources to cultivate
empathy for its own sake, because one never knows what might come from it?
Reconciliation does not come out of nowhere; it itself is a result of deeper
feelings and experiences.
This is the chapter where the
realities of ministry dedicated to the 3Rs becomes evident. Meetings begin with
great illusions and end with disillusionment. This is something to bear in mind
with all ministry; people invest a lot in hopes for a ministry and a minister,
and bubbles burst, human foibles are manifest, and the higher the illusion to
begin the deeper the disillusion occurs. The task is then to know this from the
start and to plan for it and to continue to show up when the illusions burst.
It reminds me of spiritual steps attributed to Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh
which I have altered just a little: 1. Show Up. (much reconciliation happens
just when we show up to be with others in hard times and for hard issues) 2.
Pay Attention. (this is where empathy and other emotions can communicate; just
showing up and staying within our own minds does not advance relationships; we
need mindfulness). 3. Speak the truth in love (be authentic, be vulnerable,
speak from your own experience; speaking truth without love will backfire, as
will holding back your experiences of truth from fear of hurting others
feelings). 4. Understand your goals, your mission, but be flexible on how to
reach them; don’t be too attached to fixed preconceived outcomes; sometimes the
process is the goal when it comes to reconciliation. 5. When you fail at steps
1-4, show up again.
Sometimes reconciliation realities
set in when those who are caught up by the spirit and vision of reconciliation
bring different outcomes in mind then the group does. Sometimes, as in the case
Perkins describes where the student is upset because of a Statement of Faith,
people who are relocating and stepping out of their comfort zones will look for
ways to make their new environment as familiar to them, and to their culture,
as they can be in order to have a semblance of homeostasis. Note too how
Perkins, in a misisonal mindset, puts first stock on the statement of purpose,
what calls them together, and later shore it up with a Statement of Faith as a
way of sustaining their purpose; this is a move that puts external focus first
before the internal group. It emphasizes “acting our way into new thoughts”,
rather than “thinking our way into new actions.” In many ways Perkins approach
fell between the cracks of people’s expectations. His stance on the Billy
Graham Crusade was an example of this: he pushed people to go deeper and
consider what kind of Christian they were seeking to grow? What characteristics
of Christian life, not just beliefs, should we be focused on?
Note how Perkins breaks down
dichotomies or ends of the spectrum between faith and works, spirituality and
service and social justice: reconciling one’s self with God means reconciling
one’s self with one’s neighbors, and especially the notion of neighbors as
exemplified in the parable of the Samaritan along the road between Jerusalem and
Jericho, with those who are different from us.
Also, note here in this section about
being reconciled with those who are closest to us; his anecdote of creating ill
will with his closest followers due to his decision to cut off ties with their
ministry so they would learn to be independent; it drove him to remember the
need of living in right relationships in his inner circle.
When the mission is to form
relationships of reconciliation, for the sake of the relationships, it may lead
to both disruptions in relationships but also to amazing acts of
reconciliation; the integration of the churches is an aim for him, but he found
that, as he said for whatever reasons (can you imagine what they might be?)
both the white and black churches did not want to broach the subject, and
instead by focusing on mission together that created a common culture which
then led to instances of integration.
In his chapter, Ten Years Later,
Perkins takes us on a tour of amazing places where his ministry has had an
impact on his community. It leads me to pondering the question of “Where is the
church?” Is it in the housing developments, the health clinic, the farm, and
the many other programs they helped to initiate? The spirit of Jesus is made
visible in all those ways. At the same time (p. 134) he claims, in bringing us
to the sanctuary where worship takes place, that “the church fellowship is at
the heart of everything we do.” Worship is the heart beat that creates the
blood that is pumped into all the limbs of the body that are outside the
sanctuary engaging the community; together they create a manifestation of the
Body of Christ. But can you have one without the other and still have a healthy
body?
Not only that, but when Perkins talks
about the way that different community contexts require different forms of
organizing, he gives us the example of the work in New Hebron. There the
holistic ministry is not like the spokes of a ministry that has a church
organization and worship at its hub; instead (p. 142) there the primary embodiment
is the ministries that are not explicitly “Christian identified”, though they
work in close cooperation with churches in the community, and are not seen as a
separate church body that could be seen in competition with the other churches
in the community. There is also the more organic than organizational ,
informal, relational “body life” gatherings that many of the staff people in
the programs coordinate to support and
nurture their faith that they live out in their daily work and life. Is that not
“church” too?
But let us not forget that all of the
visible ministries, and the sanctuary and worship too, were grounded in his
desire to promote avenues for racial reconciliation; that struggle is a primary
one and is intertwined with what it means to be reconciled with God and God’s
justice. There is a danger in how even that goal can be sidelined with the
attention paid to all the forms of ministry and church that were developed by
Perkins. So he is observant to how racial reconciliation emerges and is
challenged and defeated and rises again through those various and diverse
manifestations of “holistic ministries.”
One way to promote the integration of
the church is to pay attention to the different nuances between “a church” and
“the church”. The more we focus on being a member of “a church” then all of the
difficulties arise when that sense of “a church” is bound up with its history
and geography and ethnic culture and traditions that make it difficult for
people not a part of all of that to cross the threshold and become a part of
it, whether, for one example, it is blacks going to a white church or whites
going to a black church, etc. But if we find our ultimate membership in being
in “the church” with different manifestations in different places and people,
and yet times and places and ways that those different manifestations can come
together to more fully approximate and embody “the church” then some of the
identity markers and the history and separate traditions, all of which have
their place and are nurturing, won’t hinder the movement together of racial
reconciliation.
Discussion Questions:
1.
What story of Perkins in these
chapters moved you the most, and why?
2.
Give us a tour of a vision, as
specific as you can be, for ten years from now of what your community service
organization or project might look like; what impact is it having, ten years
from now, on its wider community?