Saturday, June 6, 2009

From Movements to Monuments

History needs people who are willing to look at the status quo and simply ask the tough questions: Why do we need to do it that way? What does that say about us? What if we try something different? What if we’ve been wrong for quite some time? Who is making these decisions and why?

Each generation looks back in hindsight and remembers the women and men who have asked tough questions like these. Without them, our world would be a much different place. Often, those who challenge the status quo are viewed with contempt by those currently in power. They are seen as rebellious, characterized as stirring up trouble, and are given a scarlet letter by those in leadership.

-Martin Luther was excommunicated by the Catholic Church and threatened with execution after he questioned, among other things, the doctrine of papal infallibility and the selling of indulgences. His desire was not to start a revolution, but to begin a conversation about church power.

-Gandhi peacefully protested against governmental abuse in India. Never raising his fist, he upset those in power, which led to his eventual assassination. 

-John Wesley asked questions of the Anglican Church that pertained to many aspects of church life, including ordination of the ordinary church person and a proper understanding of the Holy Spirit. As a result, he was strongly persecuted by the Church of England and accused of heresy.

-Martin Luther King Jr. is seen as the premier figure in the civil rights movement. His sermons, talks, protests, and marches led to the eventual abolishment of institutional segregation. What did he receive in return? Imprisonment, harassment, threats upon his family and eventual assassination. But history will never forget him.

While world history is filled with those who challenged the status quo, Christianity’s entire foundation is based upon challenging notions of absolute power. Whether it is the Old Testament prophets staring down the unjust kings of Israel or Jesus proclaiming a Kingdom other than Caesar’s while at the same time shaking the Pharisees to their core, Christianity is at its heart a dialogue about what’s right and who’s ultimately in charge.

The denomination in which I grew up proudly calls itself a movement, but after observing it for a number of years, it is evident that it has stopped moving. Somewhere along the way, it forgot what made it move in the first place. After a number of years, most all movements lose momentum and forget to move. They become institutions. They attain the power and abuse they once fought against and they become comfortable. 

When I’m comfortable, I don’t want to be moved. I don’t even really want to talk, let alone engage in some kind of action or dialogue.

When an object ceases to move and stands still for a number of years, it no longer deserves to be called a movement. It is a monument. Undoubtedly, those who point out the abuse of power and inaction of the Church will be called heretics and maybe even tools of Satan. This is typical, and I like to think that they are in good company. 

If the nature of institutions is to enjoy power and discourage honest questions and dialogue, then maybe such “strife” is needed. Maybe it is even a divine calling and gift of God that springs new movements.

Now I want to hear what you think. Am I way off base here?