Embrace Difference Celebrate Diversity

Free Community Church
June 12, 2011
Embrace Difference Celebrate Diversity
Acts 2; I Corinthians 12

Musical Prelude: You tube Dealing with Diversity (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2PgFn01mEk&feature=related)

You have watched how to deal with diversity in the You Tube video from Phil Collins Academy Award song “You’ll be in my Heart.” The title of the video is however “Dealing with Diversity” which seems to me to relate to Pentecost Sunday and the building of a community.

I have submitted my article in support of Pink Dot 2011 in response to Sylvia Tan’s request after she first watched the promotional video. That was published in Fridae last Friday night and I posted it also in my Facebook and blog. The title that I used is “Embrace Difference - Celebrate Diversity.”

Our lectionary for today is from the Acts of the Apostles account of Pentecost which is being read in Christian congregations today throughout this Christian world and will be dramatically presented as the descent of the Holy Spirit like tongues on fire upon the crowd gathered in Jerusalem fifty days after the Resurrection of the Crucified Jesus. This day is generally regarded as the birthday of the Christian Church. I could join them like I did before on every Pentecost and give the usual interpretation and preach the traditional message. But how do I discern its significance for us today.

Just look at these artistic presentations of Pentecost from the modern European backwards to the traditional Middle Eastern and the ancient past. Each is a different portrayal.

It is a matter of perspective on how it is being viewed and through what kind of lenses and time and circumstances.

Desmond Tutu in his new book “God is not a Christian and other Provocations” tells the story of a drunk who crossed the street and accosted a pedestrian, asking him, "I shay, which ish the other shide of the shtreet?" The pedestrian, somewhat nonplussed, replied, "That side, of course!" The drunk said, "Shtrange. When I wash on that shide, they shaid it wash thish shide."

Where the other side of the street is depends on where we are. Our perspective differs with our context, the things that have helped to form us; and religion is one of the most potent of these formative influences, helping to determine how and what we apprehend of reality and how we operate in our own specific context.

But being in FCC I have the opportunity to examine the Biblical text more closely and from a different perspective – from the perspective of the LGBTQ or Queer Theology or seeing with queer eyes. We have to put on this distinctive lens to view that historical event recorded over 2,000 years ago. Otherwise it will only have antiquated or classical interests with little relevance to what we need to experience in the contemporary world.
The person who wrote about that event is reputed to be Luke the physician and scholars tell us that he did it about fifty years after the first Pentecost in 80 Common Era. It served a purpose more in formulating Christian doctrine than recording a historical event.

The undeniable historical fact is that Jesus was crucified as a common criminal for a political crime of subverting the Roman government. Jesus was accused of leading a movement agitating the poor peasants in Galilee suffering from the heavy tax burden to support the Roman colonial power and the religious hierarchy in the Temple of Jerusalem. These rebellious Jews recalled their religious history and regarded Jesus as the long expected Messiah who will restore the glorious Jewish kingdom like that of King David in the past. So the religious and political authorities conspired to put to death Jesus. The hopes of the people were crushed and some leaders even abandoned the movement and returned to their former jobs. Some were so bewildered that they had to remain in the Upper Room and wait for help and direction.

If we look at the text more closely we will discover there is some exaggeration about the actual incident. The people who first gathered in the “room upstairs” were a few of the disciples, “together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as his brothers.” Location is the small room in a house.

On the day of Pentecost this intimate family circle were in the same Upper Room , “One place” and “the rush of the wind filled the entire house where they were sitting.”

The scene abruptly shifted.

It moved to the outdoors around the Temple where a massive crowd came together of Jews living in Jerusalem and Jews in diaspora who came from different nations who spoke different languages. They were listed as “Parthians, Medes, Elamites, Mesopotamia, Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, Phyrgia, Pamphylia, Libya, Rome, Cretan, and Arabs. They were Jews and proselytes or converted Jews. It was a very diverse group in those days. They heard the small Galilean group speaking and the strange thing was that they heard them speaking in their “own native language.” Initially they mocked them as being drunk. Then Peter rose and spoke to them and interpreted the event as the fulfilment of the teaching of the Prophet Joel who taught that the Spirit of God will be present “upon all flesh” including sons and daughters, young men and old men, men and women slaves. They were called to repentance and three thousand were baptized and received the Holy Spirit. Hence the birthday of the Christian Church was regarded to have taken place then.

Here is an example of how a number of issues were clustered together. From this account what actually happened is hard to decipher even though it was recorded in the Bible as the historical event of Pentecost.

There are different ways of interpreting this or any narrative. Dominic Crossan has perceptively identified the way which most religious people will do - either as history remembered or prophecy historicized. For the historian or religionist it is usually a mixture of history and doctrine or prophecy. That is to say there is the literal way of regarding this story as recorded history. Even then eyewitnesses record it differently. When religion comes into play there is interpretation and trying to appear historical and not theological. Then there is an attempt to believe that all events are determined by God and in fulfilment of God's prophecy. This view does not recognize the freedom of human beings sinful as we all. We are provided with choice and decide. Most of the time we deliberately do what we even can admit though reluctantly to be contrary to what God expects us to do. Look at the prophecy of Joel

Take another example in the contrasting story of Pentecost with that of the Tower of Babel. It was the contention that human kind is one human family – one nation, one language and even one religion. So they came together and with arrogance built this tower piercing the clouds above and stabbing the skies with the attempt of reaching heaven. Then the story goes to say that God punished the pride of humankind and caused the tower to tumble down and scatter the one human community in different places and each speaking their own language.

One way for the people to understand differences is that God punished the people who wanted to continue to live in unity of one race and one common language. But they have to give an explanation for all the differences that the Israelites found around them. They continued to take pride as Chosen People blessed by God and aided to fight the holy wars against the other tribes and those who do not share their religious beliefs. God was believed to be on their side to go to war to eliminate the pagans, slaughter the innocent women and children and establish the holy kingdom like what King David did. This is again all in fulfilment of prophecy of God’s will.

Fundamentalist and conservative approaches have a way and the only way to interpret sacred writings of their faith. They follow the only one way to heaven or even to earthly salvation of humankind.

Take the recent example of prophecy historicised of Rev Harold Camping who is still at it. Turns out the end of the world, scheduled for Saturday, May 21, 2011, was not, after all, the end of the world. Or maybe it was. Camping is saying now that it was an “invisible judgment day” and that the revised end-time date is October 21, 2011, five months hence. He is not the only one. A number of other cult leaders have done that before and will continue to do so.

When I was in the seminary in Boston in 1954, we have the account of the beginning of the historic Old Howard burlesque or strip-tease theatre. The local history recorded that it was built originally in 1843 as a Church by a Christian sect led by William Miller who predicted end time to come in 1844. It was used as the gathering of people who believe in the literal end time. This Boston group with such a belief were clothed in clean white robes and waited for it to occur and were in the Theatre for the rapture. The predicted time of prophecy went by and nothing happened. What did they do. Local legend says that they stripped off their clothes and paraded out. And Old Howard Theatre has been stripping since then to entertain tourists. It has some years ago been re-developed into a Government Centre and still stripping – stripping the people of their money.

Embrace Difference
We have in the slow march of history come to deal with the irreversible fact of difference. Even at the stage of the first Pentecost it was still essentially a Jewish event. In our hurrying to change our lenses from the Jewish to Christian ones we are caught with viewing it as the birthday of the Christian Church. It was really the birthday of the Jesus movement or the Jewish followers of Jesus of Nazareth, the Crucified One. They were from their ancestral lands and in dispersion or diaspora in the regions around them as listed in the Biblical account. They were Jews and some who have been converted and embraced Judaism from other than the Twelve tribes of Israel. Christianity as a religion developed much later towards the end of the century. When the event of Pentecost unfolded Paul was not on the scene. With Paul's leadership in his mission to the non-Jews or Gentiles we see the real beginnings Christianity which eventually separated itself from the Jewish religion. There were more Gentiles than Jews who followed Jesus that composed the Christian community. Under Paul’s mission the distinctive act of circumcision was set aside and the non-Jews were welcomed into this new diverse wider community of former Jews and pagans.

Paul goes further to extend this wider community beyond the Jewish and the Christian. He talks the unity between Jew and Gentile, slave and free for we are all born of the same Spirit.

In the globalized and inter-connected world in which we live we have to make the paradigm shift to embrace difference and celebrate diversity. This is the theme of my message in support of Pink Dot 2011. The LGBTQ community as one which has been stigmatized and marginalized know what is to be regarded as different from the majority and rejected by them.

It is crucial and fundamental that we have to accept ourselves as we are with our different sexual orientation. Self-acceptance is the first step. The faith we profess must enable us to love ourselves for the more excellent way is that of love. God loves us as we are. We do not have to conform to the majority.

Yes we can affirm that God has created difference. In our conservative and conformist society we tend to fear difference and shun diversity. It is difficult for most of us to accept difference and value diversity. Look at the way we try to conform to the majority and hide our difference and blend with them. We really ought to accept ourselves individually distinct and different from others. On the other hand we in our rebellious mood and in our frustration highlight our differences just to be recognized. We colour ourselves in different shades from the hair at the top of our heads and to the nails to the toe nail in our feet. We put on strange styles of apparel and behaviour and act in a weird or bizaar manner. Can we be just normal and natural in the manner in which we were created. Could we stop feeling guilty for being different. Individually each one of us is different and queer.

Celebrate Diversity

What follows when we accept ourselves. Even when we admit that we have different gifts including sexual orientation there is a tendency to succumb to exclusivism. We have to shift from individualistic tendencies to relational opportunities to shape the spirit of community. The human person is an important feature of first-century Mediterranean culture and Asian. It is group- oriented and not individualistic in contrast with Western culture.

The variety of gifts when brought together builds community. The common vision is one of peace and harmony which serves to build up further the community common good. That is why Paul in Corinthians encouraged mutual interdependence in the metaphor of the body.

We have to resist the powers of exclusion. Theologies in line with Queer Theology must take seriously the issues of marginalization and oppression. We are placed in better position because we have been victims and suffered for we have captured the roots of our common pain. Attention to other specific structures of exclusion beyond sexual orientation seems to be a necessary step in promoting greater inclusivity. Paul has enlarged the community further beyond to Jew and Gentile, slave or free.

Shaping Community
Earlier the followers of Pentecost subsequently were called by Peter in his sermon to save themselves from this corrupt generation. “And who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions of goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as many as had need. Day by day they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home, and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having the goodwill of all the people.” (Acts 2:41-47)

Our common calling is to continue to use the above metaphor and build communities relevant to our situation. It has to been an inclusive community where we do not exclude any of God’s children. In embracing difference we are valuing diversity. We are to relate and learn from one another and together render mutual support and work for our common good. This is the form of celebration of our diversity. Discriminated against groups like FCC have this unique role to play in the wider community of not just the church but also to live and work in mutuality in our diversity.

Together we are to be caring and compassionate of those who are in need. We are to ensure justice and equality for all. This is the implication of the celebration of diversity even as we embrace difference. On this Pentecost
Sunday let each one of us in our own way and together in community embrace difference and celebrate diversity in shaping community.

Let me close with a message which I came across yesterday in a posting a response to my article in Fridae. “Astra”posted this reply close to midnight on Friday evening. This is what he shared:

astra
astra





2.
2011-06-10 22:52

Reverend Yap

I would like to thank you for your kind words.

I don't understand why I get teary and bawling when I read this article. "Tears of comfort" came to my mind, I feel so relieved when I was crying, I could not fully explain it. Maybe it is because your words speak to the sense of loss from trying to live against a christian upbringing, mission school doctrines, cruel classmates, homophobic pastors that shaped my young mind with dread and guilt about myself, intolerant family.

After the tears, I felt tired and relieved at the same time. I guess it matters to know I am not a mistake, coming from a man of spiritual authority. I feel I can claim my past once again, able to stand a little taller knowing that I do matter and I am worthy as like everyone else.

Life is fleeting and your words lighten my continuing journey in it.

I can come home again.

A Love Story with God

Excerpts from an interview published by Religion Dispatches:

Sarah Sentilles is the author of A Church of Her Own: What Happens When a Woman Takes the Pulpit (Harcourt, 2008) and Breaking Up with God (HarperOne, 2011).

Breaking Up with God: A Love Story
Sarah Sentilles
HarperOne (2011)

What inspired you to write it? What sparked your interest (person, event book)?

...I was almost an Episcopal priest, and now I don’t call myself a Christian. How did that happen? In the writing of the book I realized that the story I had been telling about what happened was not the whole story. I had been telling people that I left institutional Christianity because the church was sexist—which is true—but I also left institutional Christianity because my faith in God had changed dramatically. I no longer believed what I had once believed. I also told people that I lost faith in God, but I realized that isn’t exactly right either. I didn’t lose my faith. I left it. Writing this book I had to face deep parts of myself that were hard for me to look at, hard for me to admit.

What’s the most important take-home message for readers?

That there is more to God than most of us have been taught in church. That faith is an imaginative, constructive, ethical enterprise. That theology matters. That the way we think about God has a real effect on the earth and on other human beings. That we are the ones we have been waiting for. In the book I write, “This is my faith: a fragile hope in what humanity might be able to do when we stop looking for someone else to save us,” and I think that sentence sums up what the book is about.

I also think the book is an invitation, a way to let other people know that they don’t have to stay in faith communities just because they find themselves there by birth or by choice. It’s an invitation to come out as a seeker, an atheist, an agnostic, a dissatisfied believer, a questioner. Sometimes you know something doesn’t feel right, but you force yourself to stay—whether it’s in a relationship that isn’t working, in a job that is making you miserable, or in a faith community that is making you feel small and scared. That is part of why I figured my faith in God as a romantic relationship. Just like you wouldn’t tell your friend to stay with a partner who hits her, you shouldn’t tell someone to stay with a version of God that makes them sick or scared or impedes her ability to thrive and shine and be her biggest self in the world.

What are some of the biggest misconceptions about your topic?

People assume I’m an atheist, but I’m not. I don’t know what I am, but if I had to choose a label I’d choose agnostic. When I say that people usually ask me if I think God exists, and I usually give them the answer that my teacher, Gordon Kaufman, used to give me: The question of God’s existence isn’t the right question because it won’t get you very far. It’s a question human beings can’t answer. If we take God’s mystery seriously, then we can never know. I think there are better questions that we can be answering: What does a particular vision of God do to those who submit to it and to those who won’t submit to it? What difference is my version of God making? Who is it harming? In one of his books, Kaufman writes, “The central question for theology... is a practical question. How are we to live? To what should we devote ourselves? To what causes give ourselves?” He argues that theology that does not contribute significantly to struggles against inhumanity and injustice has lost sight of its point of being.

I can’t know if God exists, but I do know the word God is operating in the world, running around doing all kinds of work, good and bad, and I think, as a theologian, I have a responsibility to think critically about the kinds of gods we make and worship and to try to come up with versions of god that might make the world a more just and life-giving place for everyone.



Are you hoping to just inform readers? Give them pleasure? Piss them off?

I am hoping to do all three. I hope to help people see the wide range of possible ways to think about God. There are so many more versions of God in the Christian theological tradition than most people know about. Why has our own tradition been kept from us? And I’m not just talking about feminist and liberation and black and womanist and queer theology, which I wish everyone would read. I’m also talking about the old white male theologians who wrote amazing stuff—like Freidrich Schleiermacher and Paul Tillich. These guys wrote powerful, revelatory, life-changing stuff about God, and I feel like most theology has been lost and forgotten, or just plain ignored. Communities need to reclaim their histories. I hope to help people expand their visions for God. And I hope that will be a pleasurable experience.

I am sure my book will piss people off. I seem to do that no matter how sweet I try to be. I’m trying to embrace that fact and let go of my “good girl” self who tries to please everyone all the time. My dad always says if they aren’t shooting at you, you probably aren’t doing anything worthwhile. Or, as James Cone says, “Now is not the time to be polite.”

What alternative title would you give the book?

I love the title of my book. It’s my best title yet, I think. I write in the preface about my hesitation to figure my relationship with God as a love relationship. It seemed simultaneously so medieval-mystic, so patriarchal, so oedipal that it made me cringe. Calling it a break-up also meant I had to come out: I had to admit to myself and to the rest of the world that the God I’d been dating was a man. I’m a feminist theologian. I was mortified.

I used “A Love Story” as the subtitle because at its heart the book is about love. I loved God because I wanted God to love me. Underneath my faith was a deep need to be unconditionally loved. How we think about God—the kind of relationship in which we imagine ourselves—influences how we approach our relationships with other people. Once I let go of my version of God that linked love with shame and anger and fear, I became better able to love myself and other people.