Peter Rollins's Blog, page 51

Be Part of the Problem, Not the Solution: Free Chapter From Insurrection

I remember once the collective ikon putting on an event in The Black Box called 'Sell Church' in which the evening mimicked a type of advertising sales pitch. During the gathering the music, words and visuals were all designed to convince those attending that ikon had the solution to our problems (with subtle disclaimers hidden in various places). The evening culminated with a huge video projection of the Crucifixion in all of its gory detail overlaid with the music from a well known advertising jingle. The result was almost impossible to watch.

After a rather light-hearted night this visceral projection seemed scandalous. This scandal was not however intellectual in nature, it was more primordial than that. Most of us in attendance had grown up in an environment where the crucifixion was revered. Whatever our view of the Church, God or religion this image of an innocent, dying man had made a deep impact on us. As a result we couldn't help but be offended by what we saw. A comedic advertising jingle providing the sound track to this oversized, hyper-real crucifixion scene felt sickening.

What was most disturbing however was the way in which staring at that footage felt like staring at ourselves. Many of us glimpsed in it a repressed truth that we had reduced this event to the status of a product that promised satisfaction, happiness and fulfilment. In a world where we are constantly told that we can be fulfilled we realised that we were guilty of joining the choir and adding one more product (God) to the cosmic vending machine.

In contrast to this way of understanding the message of Christianity Insurrection offers an alternative vision. One that presents Christianity, not as yet another promise of direct fulfilment, but rather as the act of laying down such ideas and discovering how to embrace life without the need for a final solution. Here I seek to show that it is only as we directly lay down our obsessive pursuit of fulfilment that we may indirectly find it.

But in order to understand what this might mean we must first place into question the idea that there is a Solution to life, an Answer that will fulfil us, a Secret that will fill a perceived void in our existence. We must expose how this idea of there being a Solution is inherently problematic and place the idea of an ultimate Answer into question. For it is from the ashes of this product-oriented form of Christianity that we shall discover the subversive core of faith as an insurrectionary way of life that invites us to embrace the difficulty of existence rather than fleeing from it.

Some who are wiser than I have warned that my new book is more challenging and provocative than anything I have written before and thus is likely spark some angry reactions. Indeed I feel like I am currently experiencing the calm that comes just before a storm.

As readers of my blog I would like to offer you the introduction and first chapter in the hope that you might share it with others. I gave these to my mail subscribers around a month ago and my Twitter/Facebook followers a couple of weeks later (so please do sign up to these if you would like occasional advance gifts). The book itself drops on October 4th…

Introduction and First Chapter

Transformance Art

 

This is an excerpt from a session at Poets, Prophets and Preachers where Rob Bell interviewed me about my work. The full interview is available in my forthcoming book Insurrection

 

Looking To The Past: The Backward Movement of Radicals and Conservatives

A few days ago Kester Brewin posted an insightful post called 'The year of opposition' (can't link to it as I am writing this on some ipad software). In this post there was brief reference to the words 'Radical' and 'Conservative' which sparked off some debate. He then followed this up with some provisional reflections on what these words might mean.

Because of the confusion around these terms I thought I would reflect briefly on what I see as the difference. As I do this I wish to make an initial observation. When one is within a field of debate ones definition of sides will reflect the stand one has taken. So while I will attempt to offer as precise a definition of Radical and Conservative as I can in a small post, I am making a case for one over the other.

I would suggest that both the words 'Radical' and 'Conservative' as used in theology refer to a relationship with the past. In this sense they both move forward by looking back. What is at stake in their difference is the way that they relate to this past. This relation to the past is hinted at in the very etymologically of the words, as 'Radical' means to return to the roots and 'Conservative' refers to a form of conservation of what has been inherited.

In order to understand the different ways they relate to the past we need to introduce a classical philosophical distinction between potentiality and actuality, a distinction first introduced by Aristotle. Basically potentiality refers to the range of possibilities that something has (e.g. it is possible, though highly unlikely, that I could become a dancer) while actuality refers to the realising of possibility (e.g. if I were to become a dancer). One of the first things we can say in light of this distinction is that all actuality (things that have actually happened) were once potentialities. If they were not then they could never have happened. Traditionally then it has been thought that actuality is the realisation (and thus the end of) potentiality.

In light of this we could say that theological conservatives seek to protect, promote and re-articulate an actuality that they see as true, good and beautiful in the Christian tradition. In short they seek to conserve something that has actually taken place.

The opposite position to this one could be described as a kind of theological new wave that seeks to leave behind what has gone before and chart an utterly new course. Turning from what is actual and striving to build a new frame.

In contrast to both of these I would argue that the theological Radical neither affirms what is actual in the concretely existing church, nor turns away from it. Instead they embody a totally different relation to the Potentiality/Actuality relationship.

Instead of seeing actuality as the end of potentiality the theological radical, echoing Kierkegaard and others, sees a potentiality bubbling up within the actuality of the historical church. The theological radical is one who believes that there is an explosive potentiality buried within this history that ought to be realised.

Instead of turning from concretely existing Christianity, or defending it with apologetics, they are committed to delving into the actuality in order to find some as yet unrealised possibility. Something that Kierkegaard called repetition.

Thus both the radical and the conservative are interested in the past, but in different ways. One thinks that the past must continue to be brought into the present while the other thinks the past is a womb from which an utterly new event can arise (which was one of the founding claims made by Radical Theology as a movement).

This enables us to claim that the Conservative seeks to return to the early church while the radical seeks to return to the event that gave birth to the early church.

The Trash of the World: Paul and Universalism

I would like to reflect briefly on the interesting and complex area of universalism in Christianity. Something I shall be exploring more in some upcoming books. Broadly speaking we might say that there are two dominant types of universalism being advocated in the church today. The first might be called (for want of a better word) Conservative Universalism. This type of universalism draws upon the idea that the Christian message is for all (rather than some particular group). Thus the Christian message must be preached to all, who must then make a decision in light of it. This understanding of universalism employs the various scriptural references that concern the move from a gospel dedicated to the Jewish people to a gospel that reaches out to the Gentiles, as well as those missional sections of the text that speak of preaching to the ends of the earth.

The other type of universalism that we witness in the contemporary church can be loosely described as Liberal Universalism. Here there is a belief that the power of the Christian message touches and transforms all, meaning that ultimately all will be unified with God through Christ. 

There is however a different way of approaching universalism, a way that is opened up via a reading of Paul. This third reading neither confirms nor negates the above readings. Rather it causes us to rethink what it might be that the Church should be inviting people into.

In order to approach this let us recall Paul's claim that Christians are the refuse of the world. In other words, they were once a part of the world but now have been cast out into the rubbish heap. In this way Christians are the de-worlded, they are the part of no part, the community of outsiders, the excremental remainder that has been wiped from the surface of the world (the literal translation refers to a scraping off).

The question then is what this might mean and why it should be described as universalism? To answer the first part of that question we must recall how the Cross represented a divine curse. It is the symbol (or was in Paul's day) of being thrown outside of the political, religious and cultural orders. The one being crucified was naked and abandoned. They experienced their existence as broken, suffering, without meaning and hurtling toward death. In this way the one being crucified was made to experience nihilism in the most visceral, material and horrific way. Those who were crucified were utterly de-worlded, placed outside the walls (quite literally as well as symbolically) and left to experience their last hours in an ocean of unrelenting suffering.

So then, when Paul preaches 'Christ Crucified' and speaks of the body of believers as the 'refuse of the world' he is saying that the body of believers are the ones who participate in this experience in some deeply existential way (and often in a deeply material way too). 

This view can be described as a new form of universalism for at least two reasons. Firstly, every universalism provides a mode of thought that renders previously solid distinctions into thin air. They encompass a previous binary that was, up until that time, taken as absolute. 

Here Paul writes of a community that transcends the seemingly natural and absolute division of his day that existed between Jew and Gentile. In this new category of the Pauline outsider whether you were a Jew or Gentile became unimportant. What was important was the experience of the Cross, i.e. the experience of existing outside the tribal communities you were a part of. 

Secondly it is a form of universalism in the way that it relates to a human reality that is open to all. To understand this let us recall Sartre's famous reflection on a Parisian waiter. He once saw a waiter who was so absorbed in his role as a waiter that he seemed to define himself in terms of that job. Sartre wrote of how this young man was acting in a mode of inauthenticity because he was not embracing the reality that he cannot be contained by the roles he plays in life. 

In the same way the various identities that we adopt are useful, but we miss something vital about our humanity if we act as if we are fully defined by them. The problem is that we do not want to embrace this insight because it is terrifying to do so. It is terrifying because the various beliefs and roles we adopt help us to feel like masters of our own universe, they protect us from the experience of chaos and give us a type of compass that can direct our activity. 

Yet Paul calls us to fully face up to and enter into the truth that we are all naked, broken and hurtling toward death. He is calling us to identify with Christ on the Cross and thus embrace a profound experience of nihilism. But the trick is that in facing up to and embracing ourselves as outsiders in this way we actually find a form of liberation and freedom Paul knew as Resurrection life.

If we were to attempt to reflect Paul's insight (that we are the trash of the world, the excremental remainder that has no place) in a church environment what might that look like? Perhaps it would involve rituals, music and preaching that caused us to question what we take for granted. Perhaps it would mean learning from, leaning toward and reaching out to the people who live day to day as the trash of the world. Just perhaps it would involve an hour in our week where we lay down the various political, religious and cultural narratives that protect us from looking at our own brokenness and allow it to be brought to light. Not so that it will have power over us, but so that its power over us will be broken. For when we suppress our darkness it always comes out in other ways. 

For example, if a church leader wants to have an affair yet prohibits himself from doing so the prohibition might work in stopping the primary act, but it will not overcome the desire. Rather the prohibition will simply reallocate the desire (e.g. in hatred of his partner, drinking, self-loathing etc.). It is only when one is in a community where the desires can be acknowledged that they begin to loose their power.

The Power of Parable

This is an excerpt from a session at Poets, Prophets and Preachers where Rob Bell interviewed me about my work. The full interview is available in my forthcoming book Insurrection

 

The Church Shouldn't Do Worship, The Charts Have That Covered

Living in the US I have frequently had a strange experience while flicking through the car radio. There have been times when I find some cheesy pop ballad or inane soft rock track to listen to as I drive. But then, as I hum along to the music, I discover that it is actually some contemporary Christian worship song.

Part of the reason why I get caught off guard lies in the way that so much Christian music emulates the structure of popular music. In order to begin to reflect upon what this means (and these are only provisional reflections) we could offer the following working definition of worship music: any music that presents someone or thing as the fulfilment of a gap at the core of our being.

For example a worship song might hold up a woman, fame, sex, money, revenge, Jesus etc. as that which is the answer to our sense of being incomplete. This should not be confused with a piece of music that simply celebrates and upholds someone or thing as good, beautiful and worthy. Rather it describes a song that holds someone or thing as the absolute answer.

It is not then the person or thing which makes a piece of music a worship song but rather the position that person or thing holds in the song itself (as that which fills, or would fill, a perceived void).

The most immediate problem with singing such songs in church lies in the way that it reduces the source of faith to just one more product promising us fulfilment and happiness in our soul. The church is then reduced to just one more company with it's advertising sales pitch, it's promises of happiness and it's impotent snake oil supplement to supposedly enhance our lives.

In contrast to such music there are songs that don't posit fulfilment but which rather ask us to stop pursuing such a false path and embrace life in all of it's messiness. Songs which celebrate the good times and face up to the bad times. Songs that bring us face to face with ourselves.

In their humanity such songs do not promise a way to be fulfilled but rather invite us to face up to and embrace our lack of fulfilment. To find meaning in the smallest of things such as a stolen kiss, an unexpected conversation, a short email or shared meal. They tell us that the devil does not reside in the tiny details of our lives but rather the divine. And they remind us that beauty is to be found in the most fragile and flimsy of things.

I am not sure if these songs could properly be described as worship or not for they do not directly hold up and celebrate some god (that person or thing which we believe will make us complete). Yet by encouraging us to lay down the desire for that which we believe will fulfil us, and instead embrace the world, the trick is that we (indirectly) find a deep form of happiness and fulfilment.

In such songs (which transcend specific genres, even if they are found in some more than others) radical faith communities will find their liturgical heart. For these songs do not posit some god-object to fulfil our desires but rather encourage us to find meaning and beauty in the world we inhabit. They sensitise us to one another, encouraging us to embrace each others brokenness and stand together in our joys and sufferings.

It is here, in the difficult celebration of life, that God is manifest: not as that which we sing to but rather as the source which makes us able to sing. 

Such songs remind us that the Holy of Holies is not a place we ought to love but rather a place that is manifest in the act of love itself. 

To conclude these provisional thoughts, what if church is the place we go precisely to escape worship music, instead singing songs that invite us to turn our backs on some ultimate solution and affirm the life we find ourselves in? A place where the art encourages us to find meaning, beauty and goodness in our world rather than in something beyond it? 

This affirmation of life should not in any way be seen as a call to remain in the relationships, jobs or situations we currently find ourselves in. This is not a call for conserving the status quo. For truly affirming our lives often means making important steps in changing them. It is by courageously entering into grace (the act of accepting our life as it is) that we are able to change our lives.

Material Faith

This is an excerpt from a session at Poets, Prophets and Preachers where Rob Bell interviewed me about my work. The full interview is available in my forthcoming book Insurrection

 

Apocalypse, Belfast NI

Title – The Apocalypse Isn't Coming; Its already Happened

Place – Black Box Cafe

Time – 9:30PM

Cost – Donations

 

Fundamentalist Christianity has long expressed a view of apocalypse as some future event that will consume the present world and replace it with a new one. Yet while this is a bloody and destructive vision I will argue that it is inherently conservative in nature and nowhere near violent enough to warrant the name "apocalypse". For those who hold to such a vision are willing to imagine absolutely everything around them changing so that their present values and beliefs can remain utterly unchanged. In contrast I will argue that a Christian apocalypse describes something much more radical, namely an event that fundamentally ruptures and re-configures our longings, hopes and desires rather than simply positing a future world where they will be fulfilled.

This talk will outline an alternative theological vision that transcends the usual distinctions between theist and atheist, sacred and secular, belief and doubt. A vision that turns away from the actually existing church and outlines a faith that is not concerned with the question of life after death but rather with the possibility of life before death.

For directions to the Black Box Cafe click here

Talk in Belfast: The Apocalypse Isn't Coming; Its Already Happened

MONDAY 5TH SEPTEMBER | BLACK BOX CAFE | 7:30PM

I have just arranged to give a seminar in my home city of Belfast. The venue is quite small so please come a little early if you want to guarantee getting a spot. If you plan to attend let me know via the comment box, or on facebook, so that I have an idea of how many people to expect! Also, there will be a request for donations. Thanks.

Here is a brief description of what I will be exploring,

 

Fundamentalist Christianity has long expressed a view of apocalypse as some future event that will consume the present world and replace it with a new one. Yet while this is a bloody and destructive vision I will argue that it is inherently conservative in nature and nowhere near violent enough to warrant the name "apocalypse". For those who hold to such a vision are willing to imagine absolutely everything around them changing so that their present values and beliefs can remain utterly unchanged. In contrast I will argue that a Christian apocalypse describes something much more radical, namely an event that fundamentally ruptures and re-configures our longings, hopes and desires rather than simply positing a future world where they will be fulfilled.

This talk will outline an alternative theological vision that transcends the usual distinctions between theist and atheist, sacred and secular, belief and doubt. A vision that turns away from the actually existing church and outlines a faith that is not concerned with the question of life after death but rather with the possibility of life before death.

For directions to the Black Box Cafe click here

Pyro-theology

This is an excerpt from a session at Poets, Prophets and Preachers where Rob Bell interviewed me about my work. The full interview is available in my forthcoming book Insurrection