In the Jamie Smith interview on American Public Media Friday night, one piece really hits the heart of my previously expressed concerns about the way dialogue (or lack therof) is happening/not happening between “RO and Sojo”. The following reflections can also be crucial for us to remember in our treatment of the “left”, whom it seems to me are much closer to RO in their “theological” reflection on what ills society. The way in which responsible “activity in response” is prioritized seems to be the issue, and Jamie talks about Sojourners as being “too much confidence in marshaling the state “machine” to get done prophetic faith”….and on that count, “too much” may well be correct. On the OTHER hand, although I think the first order of reaction/response should be “Do Something About it as a church” (ie. Hauerwas’ “The task of the church is to BE the church”), I do believe there ARE people who are called to be “ambassadors” to government. Some of those are IN government ( I think of former Ohio Senator Tony Hall), and some of these “ambassadors” are perhaps lobbyists or new types of advocates for issues, which may well have some kind of ecumenical backing. I believe there are roles and places for such people and callings. But NOT to exclusion of structures in the church which marshall the resources of the People of God in that church.

This is certainly a pitfall of focusing all our talk about justice on governmental responsibilities and failings. Fail they do, and often and consistently (mostly due to not actually trying but saying they are trying). The point is, this IS the Church’s job. But there ISD a value in making things visible, so that more of the people who associate themselves with churches who are NOT teaching them about “the principalities and powers” and how to name them (but in some cases even aiding and abetting these powers and finding theological rationale for it)

Here’s what Jamie says in the piece on “Fundamentalism of the Left”:

“There is within evangelicalism, a left wing version of [right wing fundamentalism], where there’s a party line, and you come to this set of conclusions and then you don’t question them, [ so that ] “the worst thing in the world would be to even sound like a conservative, therefore we’re going to take positions that run as far as possible from even the danger of sounding like conservative evangelical Christians, and I just find that equally maddening , frustrating and small-minded, in a way. It’s people who aren’t willing to risk identifying and affirming “what’s right” in the Right (could be a veiled reference to God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets it Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It, don’t you think?)

She asks Jamie: Are you in conversation with these “other kinds of Christians?” who are more on the left?

“There’s maybe two versions of Evangelicals who are more “progressive”, “leftish” whatever you might want to say . One set identifies very closely with Sojourners community, Jim Wallis, that kind of project. Now that’s one that I think, persoanlly, has too much confidence in marshaling the state “machine” to get done prophetic faith”

Then she says:” I’d say that Jim Wallis is also been very effective at marshalling, publishing, and PR”, and Jamie says “Yeah, and so this is probably half jealousy on my part”. There’s another group that I find resonates much more with me, and that’s someting called the ecclesia project……tries to sketch out not a “middle ground [between the Religious Left and the Religious Right], but a third way, which has a much closer tie to the practices of the church, to thinking about the church as this alternative “polis”, alternative community which exhibits its own politics”

I too like the Ecclesia Proiject sensibilties, but want to hear more specifics concerning the alternate “polis”. This is where the Church of the Saviour history and narrative have much to teach the American church about what a truly alternative people and society looks like.

The piece below from the program talks about how so much of the coverage of this debate about “church and state” has played out in public:

Krista Tippett, host: Jamie Smith says he finds his passion in the borderlands between philosophy, theology, ethics, esthetics and politics. He writes two blogs where he reflects on new theology and on periodicals and newspapers, both religious and secular. He’s written this, “Just as Western anthropologists of generations past trudged through island jungles in search of the exotic ‘other’ in primitive societies, so today journalists depart from the safety and civilization of Manhattan to the exotic environs of Kansas or Oklahoma or Florida or Colorado Springs.” He continues, “Their articles read a bit like dispatches from strange lands. ‘I’ve been to red America,’ they seem to say, ‘and it’s stranger and scarier than you could have imagined.'” I asked Jamie Smith what, in his mind, goes wrong when these and other journalistic explorers seek to understand evangelicals.

Mr. Smith: On the one hand one has to be encouraged that there are a lot of journalists who are trying to do a lot better in taking seriously not just the force of evangelicalism or how significant it is, but are trying to get a handle on the nuances of it a little more. I think the piece that’s missing is there’s still an element of this alien feature of treating evangelicals either in a very alarmist way, with quite fearful tones like, “The beast is rising out of Kansas. What are we going to do?” And I guess maybe what’s missing is a certain amount of charity with respect to appreciating, well, why would so many really, you know, basically good, honest, really sincere Christian people be so captivated by agendas that might bother us or worry us? To say that we should be worried by these agendas is not the same — we shouldn’t therefore conclude that we should be worried about these people. Secular media does not always give them the benefit of the doubt.

Ms. Tippett: Evangelical Christian Americans?

Mr. Smith: Yeah, and here I’m not even thinking of vocal leaders like a James Dobson or someone like that. But I’m thinking of, you know, my family members who read this material and find themselves nourished by it and identify with it so much. We need to appreciate that that’s coming from fairly sincere concerns about being faithful. And I guess maybe what worries me is whether you could really understand it without being an insider.

I hear that about the family.

I also would pose the same question about “whether you could really understand it without being an insider” ; even though Jamie has pointed out that he once identified himself as being supportive of Sojourners, he hasn’t been since the emergence of the political unrest that came to a head, and so I think there is a much deeper dynamic going on in the “feel” of this and its impact upon the way people look at what is at stake. The sudden surge in popularity of Wallis happened just as the media outlets were noticing how many people were resonating with what Wallis was saying and writing.

Although Wallis hasn’t talked about the church as much in this round, he HAS emphasized its role, and Sojourners often points people to the life of the Church of the Saviour, and is a regular poit of reference and “stops” on the “tour” they give to vistiors to Sojourners that represent embodiments of the kind of justice they are talking about.

Along this same line, although Ecclesia does more insisting upon the church as the prime locus of political activity, like RO as a project, it is bereft of examples. I have seen little of the teling of stories about the ways in which the church is to BE the church. I thijnk this is why Church of the Saviour is such a powerful theological force for me. It has engenedered a rich narrative via the writings of Elizabeth O’Connor in such books as Call to Commitment, Journey Inward, Journey Outward, and The New Community, as well as Servant Leaders, Servant Structures.

I think we need MANY more stories like Church of the Saviour “out there”. I have often thought about how I see myself as being an enabler of blogs for such a people and a polis as that embodied by The Church of the Saviour. But I know there are many more out there. I belive that blogs and related Web technologies could be a monserous lift to the communications of such stories , just as Elizabeth O’Connor’s books were for COS. Just think if blogs werew already a basic staple of communications (I don;t think they’ve even reached the level of “basic” even yet).