She describes herself as a-
Follower of Jesus | Mujerista | Immigrant Latina | Writer | Refugee Worker in Baltimore | Amateur Theologian | Co-host of @dovetailcast |
Evangelical Seminary is proud to host Shane’s talk. Click the image and learn more about a school that teaches and promotesincarnational servant leadership at a core level.
Shane’s Bio:
Shane Claiborne graduated from Eastern University and did graduate work at Princeton Seminary. In 2010, he received an Honorary Doctorate from Eastern. His adventures have taken him from the streets of Calcutta where he worked with Mother Teresa to the wealthy suburbs of Chicago where he served at the influential mega-church Willow Creek. As a peacemaker, his journeys have taken him to some of the most troubled regions of the world – from Rwanda to the West Bank – and he’s been on peace delegations in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Shane is a founder and board member of The Simple Way, a faith community in inner city Philadelphia that has helped birth and connect radical faith communities around the world. He is married to Katie Jo, a North Carolina girl who also fell in love with the city (and with Shane). They were wed in St. Edwards church, the formerly abandoned cathedral into which homeless families relocated in 1995, launching the beginning of the Simple Way community and a new phase of faith-based justice making.
His work has appeared in Esquire, SPIN, Christianity Today, and The Wall Street Journal, and he has been on everything from Fox News and Al Jazeera to CNN and NPR. He’s given academic lectures at Harvard, Princeton, Brown, Liberty, Duke, and Notre Dame. Shane speaks regularly at denominational gatherings, festivals, and conferences around the globe. Follow him online at:
Shownotes (with links) from my conversation with Shane Claiborne
MIN 4:00
About 15 years ago Shane Claiborne and a few friends founded The Simple Way in the poorest section of Philadelphia where drug and sex trafficking became the main “industries” when the factories closed. Ever since then, he and his friends have been living in a communally within the neighborhood and serving the residents there in many ways.
I ask Shane, How have they sustained their communal lifestyle for so long?
Shane shares some things that have helped:
1. We are not attached what it should look like in expression or form as much as we have chosen to love each other and Jesus well and allow community to flow out of that.
“If you are in love with your vision for community you will actually destroy it.”
2. Allowing it to change over the years, from a house with 12 people sleeping all over the place in one house with one bathroom to a village of 10 or 20 houses all in the same neighborhood.
3. Helpful wisdom from the outside from others who’ve been doing communal living for a long time (The Benedictine order, for instance: 1,600 years)
6:10
What is “new monasticism” anyway? Shane explains.
6:30
“Folks are really hungry for community.”
7:20
“In Western culture we’ve lost the art of community.”
In other parts of the world this is how people have survived.
7:40
Economically impoverished communities can be community-rich (places) because they need each other.
7:50
“It’s no coincidence that in some of the richest places in the world we have the highest rates of loneliness..and depression, and suicide.”
8:00
“We are made to love and be loved.”
8:20
Even the mega-churches put in a lot of effort into making small groups work well (because that’s how you find community).
8:40
New Monasticism (as lived out in the U.S. or other wealthy Western countries) connects us with an ancient practice that continues on (and is “life as normal”) in many places in the world.
9:20
What communal living in Christian communities looks like in different contexts…
“Sometimes it’s about renouncing materialism and the Kardashians.”
10:00
What happens when people pilgrimage to The Simple Way to learn what it’s about.
Mother Teresa said, “Calcuttas are everywhere if we only have eyes to see. Find your Calcutta.”
11:00
There is a wisdom in learning from other communities. Shane and others set up a network called the community of communities on the web which lists other communities like his. Example: Reba Place Chicago.
This way can get rid of the romanticism and allow people to experience communal living first-hand.
Monthly open houses at A Simple Way are on ramps (to learn about community).
12:20
It’s about not just believing the doctrinal statements but about living differently and finding out what that looks like.
13:15
We are called to not be conformed to this world. God wants us to use our gifts and talents.
“Non conformity doesn’t mean uniformity.”
13;30
On the 2007 fire that destroyed his home and many other homes–leaving about 100 families with nowhere to sleep and live. Shane was left in need within the community he helped.
The very surprising statement the Red Cross relief worker told him.
14:00
There are 700 abandon factories and 20,00 abandon houses nearby.
15:30
Their community has built a park, a greenhouse, green spaces for gardens. See photos at TheSimpleWay.org
16:20
How the neighborhood pulled together after the devastating fire of 2007.
16:40
Shane:
As Jesus said, “Don’t worry about tomorrow. Don’t stock up your treasure that moths… and fires… can burn up and destroy.”
17:10
Ministry is mutual and if we don’t have needs we can’t be blessed. (Lisa)
18:30
One of Shane’s favorite quotes:
“If you’ve just come to help me, you’re wasting your time. But, if you’ve come because your survival and mine are bound up together, then let’s hold hands and we’ll work together.”
18:40
This quote comes in and corrects the posture by which we’ve often come on a mission to help people and thinking with a wrong perspective.
19:20
His friend says, “We are born on third base, but we think we’ve hit a triple.”
21:30
We don’t need has much as we think we do.
21:40
On Shane’s take of the story of “the rich young ruler”:
He wants to inherit the kingdom (entitlement thinking).
“For folks that are independent and self-sustaining it’s hard for us to know that we need God and other people.”
22:30
“Independence is not a gospel value. We need interdependence. It’s good to need other people and to need God.”
23:30
Besides people wondering what happened to his dreadlocks, people ask Shane this question the most.
24:20
Sometimes we have to challenge our location. (The places) where we (live) end up or are built around (that which) counters (opposes) gospel values. Like “suburban sprawl” which was created to get away from the urban problems (we should work to fix) and keep us from doing good for others who need it most.
It’s about living a life, not where we do great things, but where we do small things with great love (Mother Teresa). It’s not how much we do, but how much love we put into every act (of serving God).
25:00
We must ask:
What are my skills and passions and how might they connect to this world’s pain and injustice?
Whether it’s being a doctor, lawyer, plumber, or whatever, simply do your part.
26:00
What REALLY happens to the “dreds”.
Thank you, Shane! Blessings to you and your work. May we find our place to do good too.
I’d like to find out who’s listening to the show. Please help out and take this short audience survey. It will take about one minute and it’s 100% anonymous. Thanks for helping!
Click the box below.
AND Thanks for listening to the show!
Want to answer the Question of the Day?
QOTD: What is the “Calcutta” near you and what gift might you bring to it ?
As I move toward a more formed definition of how gender issues can be transcended in the Kingdom of God, I’m hitting some roadblocks obstacles. Very expectedly, too.
This “Capacitarian” proposal, if you will indulge this term, is not all cut and dry…like so many abstract things, that must come to fruition by enactment. I continue to solicit your thoughts, and input. No, I won’t give the pretense of having a fully-formed argument. “In-process” is the operative word for this excursion. Yet, I bother to bring it up, in the first place, because I see some glaring shortcomings in our current models.
If you see some, too. I hope you’ll mention them.
(And yes, I made up the word for this proposal: “Capacitarian” Pronounced: <CAP-pass-it-Tarry-ann>)
Why does the term “egalitarian” fail us?
A few have (rightly, I might add) asked, something like, “If you want men and women to be treated and appreciated with equal worth, why don’t you just say, or use the term “egalitarian”?”
Here are a few reasons:
• Egalitarianism (proper) is too closely associated with politics and economic interests. It always has been. This has a consequential, and incongruent for our purposes, legal component, too. It is an interference, not a boon, to Kingdom life and the enactment of the gospel.
• Egalitarianism, as in “Christian Egalitarianism”, is most often understood as “the idea that men and women can and should function as equals in the church,” even if (or though) the true meaning is broader. The word means something beyond gender, like, rich and poor should function as equals…able-bodied and disabled…you get the idea. The prevailing connotation has undermined the term, making it less helpful. Simply put: “Egalitarianism,” the term, is not accurate enough. It shortchanges the bigger idea of what God is up to.
• God’s economy never really jives with our own. The actual working out of egalitarianism proves this, as well. It’s not enough to say, “We’re equal, let’s act that way.” Remember something called the Jim Crow laws from 9th grade history class? (Or, even better, maybe you recall them from experience. Separate but equal is ruse, whether intentionally or not.)
The difference is that a worldview change is in order, not just a mode or method of equalizing the parties involved.
• So, I propose we let go of using human economic terms which will move the conversation forward.
Likewise, if we use words for this issue that connote or speak in terms of power, (be it: social, political, gender, economic, racial, etc) we commence at the same starting point as we’ve had before. A secular starting point.
• This faulty starting point inherently undercuts the ironically nonpolitical (apolitical) quality of Kingdom life. My idea is to get away from human-centric thinking, not co-opt with it. There is a reversal of power in God’s economy, but not an antithetical reversal. So, we’re speaking of a whole new model where one cannot simply speak of things in reverse to properly apprehend it, or put it to rights.
• Equal opportunity of the members in the Body isn’t determined primarily by sentiments that “We are all of equal worth in the eyes of God.” True as this is, it is better sourced in the nature of God as person (a.k.a. “personhood”) *See note below. God’s Story is the starting point.
Capacitarianism
• It is in the very nature of God to forgo favoritism based on things humans would see as advantageous. We may give equal opportunity because we think that it is right or just. But this worldview is not about righting wrongs, or getting it right as (humanly speaking) its fundamental application point. Rather, it’s a new way of seeing and living in this world…Kingdom Come. [Theo-centric worldview]
So, moving forward we adopt that characteristic of God for our ways of relating too. Well, more than adopt. We absorb, and live and breath it. (It is the basis of our relating.)
• It is in the overarching plans of God (as seen in the whole of Scripture) that each one of us is “set free”. We reach our full potential as this occurs. We transcend, not just overcome our cultural bondage, et.al.. (See this Lukian passage, and the prophet Isaiah)
• Thus, restrictions based on finite qualities (nationality, gender, physical ability, financial prosperity, etc.) have nothing to do with God’s nature, and his vantage point. All those restrictions are eschewed. Being “set free” is the telos of creation.
• Harmonious/loving relationship, not (primarily) equality, is main aim of children of God…Kingdom citizens, in this proposal.
Paul advises this, speaking often of and encouraging unity in the Body.
Tri-unity (Trinity) is the essence of God. God: Communion and Love reciprocated ad infinitum.
• Hierarchy, then, for our purposes, is a non issue (off the table), in any typical way we would be able to apprehend it, from a human understanding or from our experience. So, I contend that we cannot do well to draw on our flawed applications of so-called hierarchy if we are to move forward on this issue.
One more consideration on the particulars:
I propose that the idea of “the last will be first” is not a speaking of reversal of fortune, or class/status, but a full dismantling of human interaction, economy, epistemology, and eschatology as we have known it. That is to say: we don’t have a good way to gauge who is last or first, as we normally perceive life. I should also say that this means we will be very surprised who may or may not be “first”…whatever that means to God. It will likely mean something different to God, in itself, than to our understanding. God is speaking in terms, and will actualize terms in God’s way. It won’t look like what we imagine it will. I’m not sure his ways ever really have. The whole manner of the Messiah thing/Incarnation came as quite a shock, for instance.
What Capacitarian cannot be: With regard to studying the marginalized, and in particular the disabled, it is critical to note that “capacity” in human intellectual, ability, or physical terms is not the pivot point for Capacitarian thinking. The capacity denoted has to do with the Holy Spirit giving us capacity for his good work. And, “work” he what God determines it is…which may just be lying there, vegetative, and soaking in Divine love.
A case in point: A severely mentally disabled child is given great grace and capacity by God. A simple, pure, and powerful faith and enjoyment of God which may not be attained by her “normal” peers or her church family in the same capacity. She may revel in worship music, with her whole soul (being); given capacity to be aware of and experience God’s holy love in that very moment.
Likewise, others historically on the margins of society may be afforded capacity in gifting, and understanding, and the Body of Christ utilizes each one in their unique way. (This may not appear to be equal in application, or role, but it is not gender-based either.)
• Suffering, or experiencing trials, it seems increases the opportunities for said capacity. (See James 1)
Each member of the body is given full honor. Each has a gift to give to the Body.
To be continued, next week!
Your thoughts are welcome during this process. Leave your comments.
* Note that person and personality is not exclusive to humanity (human persons), but rather refers to a being, individuality, or creatureliness, plus relational capacity. A being is a person, even a divine being is, in the case that this being is accessible (imminent). Basic Theology asserts God is both transcendent and imminent. God is a Person, Three-in-one.
Next post! The promised interview with Caleb Wilde, Funeral Director and author of the upcoming book, Confessions of a Funeral Director: Working Between This World and the Next.
GUEST BIO:
