The First Thought of Christmas - Is tolerance a good thing?

Putting to one side the title of this blog, and any thoughts you have about what you should say or do, read this statement and ask yourself whether you think this practice is something that should be celebrated and encouraged:

To allow something that one dislikes or disagrees with to exist or occur without interference.

Apply this statement to a variety of scenarios. The child being bullied in the playground, the X-Factor winner claiming Christmas number one yet again, the tyranny of a country by an oppressive regime, a friend who always interrupts you as you chat with others at the pub, the ever-increasing belly that pertrudes from your torso as age takes its toll on your body's metabolism.

Each of these situations will, for many people, involve things that the individual strongly dislikes or disagrees with, things that really gripes them or drives them to despair. Obviously the extent to which they do will differ, and so too the reasons why. But in each of them, how many of us would turn, look at someone shrugging their shoulders and saying "oh well, not my business", and think to themself "wow; what a guy". And yet to me it seems that to hold up as a beacon of dignity, class and humanity this value of 'tolerance' is to do exactly that.

Some would say these signs each depict somewhat contradictory messages.

Now, we only have a limited amount of time and energy from which to act and, as such, for some things we might have to say maybe it really doesn't matter. In some cases our dislike may be down to a trifling matter of taste, and perhaps on these occasions diversity of taste is something to be embraced (although arguably whilst we might be inclined to think "yes, let the masses have their way and in droves buy the latest manufactured pop mush" perhaps instead we could make an effort to introduce them to the delights of the more acquired tastes of the latest offering of our favourite Philharmonic, or our idolised punk-thrash-metal band).

The main issue, I feel, is that people mix up arguments of tolerance versus intolerance with deciding how to express that intolerance. The desires that drove a million people to protest against the war in Iraq stem as much from intolerance as those that drove the armed forces of nations to depose Saddam Hussein and conduct the aforementioned war in the first place. Of course the action that resulted from those two incidences of intolerance differed dramatically, but, nevertheless, intolerance it was. Similarly, when faced with a playground bully you wouldn't think to tolerate it, but this intolerance could, on the one hand, mean giving the boy a thump, on the other letting a teacher put him in detention to write some lines and tell him not to do it again, or alternaitvely to seek to understand why he wants to do such a thing (has he been bullied previously, does he feel isolated, are there family troubles at home?) and help him to change and improve his life and those of them around him.

Interestingly, not many of the other Times articles mentioning tolerance (see below) have such a positive view.

As you can probably tell, my inkling in response to the question I pose in the title is that tolerance isn't all it's cracked up to be, something I was reminded of when reading the leading article in yesterday's Times ('A Time for Tolerance'). The writer brings up in his article the role of tolerance within the dynamics of the established Church - something I'll return to later in the week - but it is his closing statement that really puzzles me. He says that to fight the falsehood of other people's views is not the message of Christ, but rather that it is that "we are all, as children, equally blessed and must tolerate and respect what is good in each of us". This is the same Christ that said "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me". Not really the language of someone saying "so basically do yer best and try not to annoy anyone". No, Jesus wasn't a tolerant chap, as witnessed in his turning of the tables in the temple, in the countless occasions he confronted the religious leaders of the day and, outrageously, stood up for the marginalised and down-trodden, and most importantly in how he allowed himself to be arrested, tried and executed, that he might die for the sins of the world.

Jesus could have looked at the wrong doings of people everywhere and said "that's OK", he could have let people go on their merry way, walking to their death oblivious to the consequences of their choices and actions, but instead he chose not to tolerate it, taking the one action that could actually do anything to change things and reconcile us to God. Even the nativity stories we may have read in the last few days make this clear.

So I wonder; is tolerance just the easy way out? Are we called to be intolerant of the things we see to be wrong and unjust and to make a difference? I have a feeling the answer is yes, but that still leaves the uncomfortable and much, much harder question - what are we then going to do about it?

When you get digging you sometimes hit a nerve

Someone recently told me about a group from the 1600s known as the Diggers/True Levellers. They were a group of Christians who sort to live out the principals of the early Church in Acts. At their heart they wanted small, agrarian communities, where humans and nature had an ecological interrelationship and, essentially, ownership and property was levelled out. They were seen as anarchistic, probably would still be seen that way today to some extent, and the establishment certainly weren't too happy. They made sure the Diggers were disrupted and squashed, and after around two years were disbanded.

The reaction doesn't really surprise me. I always have a little chuckle on the inside when people say we used to be a Christian country. My experience growing up at the tail end of Christendom, and confirmed in stories I hear such as these, is that when true Christianity is witness, when the Kingdom of God breaks through, the establishment (which by the definition of Christendom includes the Church) generally feels a bit threatened and gets pretty annoyed, lashing out.

Last night in my Transform teaching we talked about the Kingdom of God, and how it is inextricably linked to economy (look at Jesus' parables). When the Kingdom comes in, the poor are preached good news, and people are set free, and that needs to be witnessed in our economy too. As the financial crisis sees the old ways of doing things crumble, I feel we really need to ask ourselves whether the focus is on looking after people until the old model is patched up and ready to go again, or alternatively do we reimagine how things are done and start to bring about new ways of living (Jubilee anyone?). Ways that protect the poor, the widow and the orphan, rather than just are own self interest.

It may be hard for us to see how that can be done on a big scale, but then Jesus often did things more relationally and intimately, starting small and demonstrating the kingdom there, and then seeing it grow. Maybe we need to start small, helping transform our relationships and our communities, and demonstrating to people there is a better way, preaching the good news and announcing that a new king (instead of financial wealth and security) has arrived?

(Biblical 'true levellers': Acts 2:42-47)

Culture Clash: Christianity and the West

Over the last year or so, as I've delved further into the Bible, the Church and the World, there've been many occasions when I've been left disillusioned about it all. Of course, I expect to be disappointed by the world as the world has a different master, but almost as often I have been left despairing about the Church, believers, and how their actions measure up against the Bible. I'm not talking about people slipping up, about having good intentions but getting it wrong, I'm talking about systematic institutions, actions and beliefs of Christians and Churches that seem to be in stark contrast to 'Biblical Christianity'.

It frustrates me how modern-day Christians can read through the Bible and mock individuals and nations for how they acted, looking down on them and making them out to be stupid, whilst sitting on their high horse. "How can you worship statues when God has shown himself so magnificently?" they say; "How can you think it is fine to sleep around and to not uphold the sanctity of marriage" think others; "How can you reject what Jesus has done and think circumcision and all the other laws are still necessary" scoffs someone else, as they open their copy of the Daily Mail, nodding in agreement with their victimisation of the poor, the alien and the downtrodden.

Somewhere along the line, Christians' beliefs as citizens of heaven have become merged with the beliefs of citizens of the UK and The West. In this series I'll try to dissect what I see as some of the manifestations of this culture clash (or more accurately the seeming lack of culture clash...) - feel free to tell me whether you think I'm right or wrong!

Not again... something needs to change

It's been a very interesting week so far with lots going on. Today I've been able to catch up with my cousin, who's coming to the end of his training before going into full service for the fire brigade. It's always good to catch up with people you haven't spoken to and this was no exception.

However, as we walked down the road to the pub, across the road there was a police van, a couple of police and tape cordoning off the street. We went in and sat down, and watched as an ambulance left, as more police arrived and as over a dozen police conducted an interview with reporters. It was obvious what had happened.

It's crazy, it really is. I don't understand it. I don't understand how people can wish to cause harm to other people, whatever the circumstances. But, whilst everyone will condemn what has happened, the trouble is that the seeds of it are demonstrated all around us. People just don't care about others, unless there is something in return for them. Cars/bikes go through red lights, because their convenience is more important than others' safety. Individuals gossip about those they know that have made a mistake or acted wrongly, because they want to be the centre of attention. Others will turn to petty crime like jumping on buses for free, taking stuff from work, or throwing their rubbish on the street, because they know they won't get caught, or they think it doesn't affect anyone.

I've heard politicians speak endlessly about how we're going to 'beat gun and knife crime'. I've been to many prayer meetings which seek to ask for an end to the violence. I've even heard politicians speak at prayer meetings and lift their prayers for an end to it all.

But this is just it. We don't get it. We want a quick fix. We want to roll out a policy, announce an amount of money that's been spent, a number of police officers that have been deployed. Or we want to spend a few hours saying prayers, asking God to intervene, seeking a divine stoppage to these atrocities. I believe policy can work, I also believe strongly that prayer works, but I also believe that this society is scarred, that it is fallen, and that the only way to bring healing to it is to live out God's standards - Kingdom values - and to change this society from its very core.

We need to start with ourselves, the choices we make and, much more than that, what our character, our essence, our very being is. When we change our heart, our actions will follow. Galatians 5:22-23 says that when we change our inner desires our life will be one of "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control". That's what we need to bring about a revolution within this society. Only when we all do this, and it becomes not a chore, but the natural thing for us to do, will society begin to mend. Only then will these scenes of police officers, cars and tape be a thing of the past.

And I can't wait.