Multiculturalism

Multiculturalism has been recently brought back to my attention. This, I think, is an interesting topic for discussion and it has shown itself in all places that I have studied. Now I do not really know what is meant by “multiculturalism” but I do know that when I was up in northern Minnesota by the reservations, there were cultural clashes going on. I have moved into western Chicagoland and there are cultural clashes going on. Even the move from a smaller, more rural northern Minnesota to the ‘burbs in Illinois became a culture shock for myself. I understand that even some have called America a melting pot of culture and people, there are way more cultures within America than I thought.


Yet there is room to consider if there is something (like a thread in a tapestry) that runs through the minds of the people that live in this land between the oceans. Because in the midst of all the multi-cultures, I believe that there are some commonalities found here. In other words, it is not a chaotic smorgasbord. I think that these threads are:


· Democratic values
· Capitalistic values
o Both lead to individualism


Let me expound a little on what I mean by these.
Democratic values are valuing such things as “equal rights” or even the terms of “rights”; “fairness”; or “equality” is democratic values. This essentially leads to an essential view of humanity as individuals because to live in a democracy, you have to be an individual. This is seen in the tangible ways such as voting which is “one voice equals one vote.” A person does not vote because of tradition, family, or arbitrary laws but based on what they value (which seems to usually fall in line with the democratic or republican party which seems to be dictated by issues of money). Equal rights are not based upon tradition, creeds, townships or customs but upon individuals. Essentially it becomes my “rights” vs. your “rights” and the law is to arbitrate between the two parties so they do not kill each other, while still having to choose between the two who is in the right and who will be in the wrong. Equality and fairness are not based upon the differences between peoples or sexes but are based upon an assumed sameness between people; this sameness being that we are all essentially individuals.


Capitalistic values are concerned with the acquisition and accumulation of personal wealth. It becomes about saving and spending, investing in retirement and in insurances, it is about becoming individually rich. It is the economic value that can create a situation where the poorest neighborhoods become islands surrounded by the richest neighborhoods and people generally will not see the problems with this. It creates a life where people can live in apartments and not know the neighbors. It creates an understanding that the poor are really getting rich off of begging or are at best just lazy or have not learned the lessons they should learn from choosing to be poor in the first place.


Hence, people are taught to essentially see themselves as individuals. Rousseau said it best in his work Social Contract that man was born free but is everywhere in bondage. This is telling us that to become free again we have to release ourselves from the bondages that surround us, which means also from each other.

Where I want to go from here is to see if there is a alternative to this.

A new year

Well, it is official, now I have neglected the post. It has been over two months since a post. I have been busy puttin in work as they used to say. School is on hold right now for the season and I have been puttin in quality time with the family. I am trying to get refreshed for the new quarter.

The meditation for this post: Renewing our relations with the Lord of all lords, the Christ.

This year is a year to step it up especially with us in the US. It sounds funny to say step it up concerning a relationship, but it is true. This is the year where we need to take the things that we say seriously when we talk about our relations with Christ. In my church (a methodist church) we just went through a covenant renewal ceremony, where we declared that the liturgy we were doing was a serious matter and to be taken with that seriousness. It was most appropriate.

Accordingly, when we say things like King of kings and Lord of lords, what does that mean or what are we really trying to say? Are we trying to use different words to say that He is lord of our souls? Or do we really take that socio-political language seriously? What does it mean? And why is the secular object that is used to compare what the church does a "business model?" Do businesses have kings? Do they produce a "body" in the way that John Locke, Thomas Hobbes and the Apostle Paul use the word? I no longer understand how it happens that the biblical narrative says so much about taking care of the poor and the widow and the fatherless and so much about justice and righteous-ness that it gets relagated into the internal private realm. The relationship with Christ is not private. The biblical narrative does not call us out to be essentially individuals but to commune with each other. It calls us out from ourselves and makes us servants which is not a private thing. Everybody should know who the servant is when one walks into the room, everyone should know who takes the orders. Servants are not hidden people for the most part but the ones waiting for the next order. That is who we should be.

Our relations need to become most real. Our allegience to Christ should really out do all others. If he is the King of all kings then our relationship with that King should be like we are in a relationship with the most powerful person the cosmos has ever seen! The relationship should not be treated like God is my little genie or my little soda machine dispenser where I put in my 50 cents (a prayer) and the product (answer to the prayer) comes out, but that we really become servants wholly to God. Live or die, all for Christ.

Topics

Oh man have I been neglecting the blog. I have been so busy with work, school and church that I let this go. So I will give some topics that I have been pondering and that God willing, I will address in the future.

I have been thinking about open/closed communion and regarding the reasons for practiciing each.

I have been thinking about the "other" or the "stranger" and when he or she enters the church doors, say an example would be a poor, homeless person: and such aspects concerning this person as what do we do to extend hospitality without extending violence.

I have been pondering theodicy, and some philosophical arguments concerning the real-ness of God. This also includes theology proper, or in other words, the aspects and attributes of God and how we should and do describe them. I also have been thinking of how I would confront the argument of theodicy.

I have been pondering worship and some aspects like the "space" in which we worship.

These are just a few of the more concrete ideas that role in my head. I have many more that are too misty to put in any concrete fashion.