Communities of the broken: The Giver’s “Village” & the victims of Rome

 


     The second volume of Lowry’s quartet – Gathering Blue[1] – introduces us to a community very different from that of Jonas.[2]  Whereas Jonas’ community no longer had any experience of death, in the opening pages, we find Kira – our second protagonist – holding vigil over her mother’s body[3] in “the Field”, i.e. her community’s “mass grave”, where the dead are left in shallow tombs to be unearthed and carried away by “beasts”.  Kira’s community is much less advanced that the futuristic one abandoned by Jonas.  Indeed, Kira’s birthplace reminds the reader of a medieval town, with a monastery-like edifice at its centre.  This is a community of hunters and peasants, where the weak are considered “worthless” and are despised (or worse), where most of the citizens live out their lives in squalor, all under the watchful eyes of the Council of 12 Guardians.

     Following her mother’s death, Kira is taken to live in the Council Edifice.  Though she has always been considered useless by most people due to her twisted leg, Kira is endowed with a gift that is coveted by the Guardians – she is amazingly skilled at needlework.  She is commissioned (required) by the Guardians to restore the “Singer’s Robe”, the garment which tells the story of her community and which is worn by the Singer at the yearly Gathering.  Kira finds herself “adopted” by a local boy – who is somewhat of a street urchin – named Matty.  After running away from the community due to his abusive home-situation, Matty returns to tell Kira that he has discovered another community where people like her – i.e. who are “broken” – are welcomed and cherished.  During her work on the Singer’s Robe and during the Gathering where the community’s song was sung, Kira came to realize that her community’s traditions serve to mask the power-games and exploitative practices of the Guardians.  Despite Matty’s invitation to run away with him to “Village”, Kira decides to remain in her dysfunctional community – as the Giver had decided to remain behind while Jonas escaped his birthplace with Gabriel – in order to work towards restoring it to wholeness and giving it the chance of better days to come.

     Village’s “community of the broken-but-indispensable” is a beautiful image of the Church, one which many western congregations now only aspire to, but one that accurately re-presents (Paul’s vision of) the Jesus-communities of the first-century Roman empire.  These were communities where those who had been dubbed shameful by both the empire and by Judaism – slaves, the poor, pagans, “barbarians”, the helpless, sinners (cf. Gal. 3.28) – were welcomed as equal members of a new family – the Body of Christ – called to share a common life marked by the pattern of crucifixion-and-resurrection, of pain and glory.  Each member of these communities was called upon to give themselves away to the others – everyone brought something to the group that the other members needed (cf. 1 Cor. 12).  Thus was the community “constructed” (cf. Eph. 4.7-16).  Indeed, the church-community was a place where one was expected, not to “perform”, but rather to serve.  One’s gifts were not intended for the stroking of one’s ego, but rather for concretely empowering other members of the community and making their lives better (cf. Phil. 2.1-11; Gal. 6.2, 9-10).  Truly, the early Church was seen to be nothing less than a new humanity (cf. 1 Cor. 15.45-49; Rom. 5.12-21).  Humans had, previously, simply not been used to acting this way, to treating each other this way, to “doing community” this way.  Paul’s revolutionary gospel created revolutionary communities which were subversive by their very nature.

     It’s important to point out that as Paul peregrinated around the empire, he didn’t simply hold debates in the marketplace (cf. Ac. 17.16-18); rather, he founded – at an astonishingly rapid rate – communities composed of those who had believed his gospel.  This is crucial – for Paul, successful evangelism/apologetics is not simply a matter of people assenting to arguments; it is all about people joining a community that embodies a countercultural way of life.[4]  Missiologist Lesslie Newbigin famously referred to the local Christian congregation as a “hermeneutic of the gospel”, i.e. the gospel makes sense (only) within the life of the community.  One way to be a local church-that-makes-sense-of-the-gospel is to develop the capacity to whimsically and persuasively (and imaginatively) share the gospel message with newcomers and establish its plausibility through both verbal and embodied witness.  This is where the “second half” of Paul’s letters takes on fresh meaning – in these “paraenetical”[5] sections, Paul offers exhortations to his readers to live in light of the gospel they have believed in.[6]  How to speak and live in such a way that our gospel becomes “good news” for those living in a world of injustice (both real and perceived)?

     Paul had a habit, during his travels to any given city, of preaching to the local members of the Jewish diaspora first (cf. Ac. 13.44-47; Rom. 1.16).  Although some Jews did indeed convert to the gospel, most of Paul’s success was among the pagan population.  Paul’s mission was to form communities of women and men who were loyal to Jesus and who were committed to sharing life together, no longer according to the conventions of Greco-Roman culture, but according to the “rules” of the ever-advancing kingdom of God.  Here we come up against Paul’s problem – while Moses had received the 10 Commandments from Yahweh (cf. Ex. 19-20), Jesus had not offered an exact equivalent to his disciples as to how to regulate their common life in the new world that he was inaugurating (the closest Jesus came to this was the Sermon on the Mount[7]; cf. Mt. 5-7).

     Actually, Moses can help us understand the challenge that Paul faced.  In 2 Cor. 3-4, Paul compares/contrasts the ministry of Moses with his own – i.e. the ministry of the old covenant and that of the new.  Paul’s mission resembled that of Moses in many ways – both men were called to “form” a motley crew – ex-slaves in one case, ex-pagans (many of whom were slaves who now had to get along with the descendants of Moses) in the other – into the people of God, i.e. into a countercultural community which would embody genuine humanness for the sake of the world (cf. Ex. 19.5-6; 2 Cor. 5.14-21; Phil. 2.14-15).  Yes, Paul was Jewish and he had “zealously” defended the “orthodox” interpretation of the Law as a Pharisee; however, as a church-planter, he had to re-think his ethics in light of the death-and-resurrection of Jesus and the gift of the Spirit (cf. Gal. 3.1-5).  Both Moses and Paul had to form the people of God in the aftermath of a crisis – the Exodus from Egypt on the one hand, and the death-and-resurrection of Jesus, on the other.  Both of these traumatic – yet salvific – events had ushered in a new reality, in which both the prophet and the apostle had to “figure out” what it meant to be God’s people.

     As we have seen, Paul – in his letters – does not give any once-and-for-all “answers” to the problems he addresses.  Rather, Paul invited his readers to “work things out” based on his in-person teaching, the Scriptures (as far as they were able to procure them, perhaps from the local synagogue? cf. Ac. 18.1-8)[8], “communal discernment” (cf. 1 Cor. 5.9-13; 6.1-6; 11.13-16, 27-32) as well as Paul’s personal example (cf. 1 Cor. 4.16; 11.1; Phil. 3.17; 1 Thess. 1.6; 2 Thess. 3.9).  Paul determined to imitate Jesus’ cruciform life (and death) – and expected his converts to join him – in the hope of sharing Jesus’ resurrection glory (cf. Phil. 3.10-11; 2.1-13).  Paul understood his churches to be outposts of the in-breaking kingdom of God that was displacing the kingdoms of this world (cf. Rev. 11.15), or rather, that the Age to Come had explosively interrupted This Present Age (cf. 1 Cor. 10.11); again, in other words, that the cosmos was undergoing birth-pangs as God’s new world was birthed (cf. Rom. 8.18-23).  Paul knew that to live in light of the victory of God-in-Christ was to embrace the cross – the place where the “rulers of this Age” had failed to grasp God’s “foolish wisdom” and had attempted to eliminate the divine threat to their power (cf. 1 Cor. 2.7-8).



[1] Boston & New York: Clarion Books, 2000.

[2] At this point, a few years have passed since Jonas left his community with Gabriel.

[3] For four days: cf. Jn. 11.39.  The belief in Kira’s community (as in ancient Israel) was that a deceased person’s spirit remained with their lifeless body for a period of four days, after which the person was believed to have thoroughly “departed” this world.

[4] Cf. Hays, Richard B. The Moral Vision of the New Testament: Community, Cross, New Creation, New York: HarperOne, 1996, pp. 24-25.

[5] Cf. Ibid, p. 17.

[6] Cf. Ibid, p. 18: Paul theologizes as he writes to the churches, and the constant aim of his theological reflection is to shape the behaviour of his communities.  Paul’s singular message of Christ crucified is made to address all the particular problems of conduct faced by his infant churches.

[7] Another mare’s nest of Christian interpretative difficulties…

[8] This passage describes Paul’s initial ministry in Corinth, where he received hospitality from someone who lived next door to the synagogue, and where the leader of the synagogue converted to faith in Jesus.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A 40-DAY JOURNEY WITH THE KING: Lenten reflections from Mark’s Gospel (5)

The Protestant Reformation - good news?

“Walking the tightrope” (St. Luke’s: Wednesday, August 22nd, 2018: Ez. 34.1-11; Ps. 23; St. Mt. 20.1-16)