One morning, a cute, perky, deeply dimpled blond woman — maybe 21 or 22 — dressed in shorts, a tank top, and carrying a pink Hello Kitty backpack bounced in and joined the group. See chatted for a while and departed, and awhile later the whole group broke up and left. When I prepared to leave, I noticed that the young woman had left her backpack. I took it to the cashier and asked if he knew the woman, he said he did not, so I looked in the backpack for identification so we could contact her. Here is a list of the contents of the backpack:
- an iPhone
- a wallet, with an “Icthus” fish emblem
- a set of headphones
- two tampons
- a strip of seven condoms (five opened and empty, two fully intact)
- a well-used Bible — heavily annotated and underlined, with about two dozen bookmarks with yarn tassels marking favorite places. The Bible was held in a protective cover, and the cover had the following four stickers on it:
- "Abortion is murder"
- "We stand with Scott Walker"
- "All means all — Support Lesbian and Gay Rights"
- "Capital Punishment is a Hate Crime"
- a pint of Raspberry vodka, two-thirds empty
- a .22 caliber handgun
Okay, quick now — liberal or conservative? Republican or Democrat? Would this young woman be comfortable in your church? Would she be welcome? Does she "fit"? Is she the kind of young adult we have in mind when we say we want more young people? Is she "normal" in today’s world?
There's been very strong correlation between views on economic and moral issues, but part of this is due to "ethnic cleansing" in the political parties. You can generally tell what someone's views on abortion are by asking about whether the rich are taxed enough, but that's partly because the Democrats have tried to purge themselves of anti-abortion figures, and not so much because the two beliefs arise from a coherent philosophy.
This lady represents a different clustering of values.
- She is a Christian who is deeply devoted to studying the Bible.
- She's interested in social justice as exemplified in trying to retrieve the levers of power from entrenched public sector unions.
- She has at least a modest amount of disposable income, and follows fashion trends.
- She believes (it is the fashion!) that people are entitled to have sex independent of marriage or children. (Homosexual "marriage" follows from this disconnect.)
- She believes that it is evil to kill the unborn.
- She believes she is in dangerous situations from time to time and wants to protect herself (but apparently hasn't asked for advice).
- She believes that the state has no right to kill, though.
I recently put together a quick-and-dirty history of early Christianity for a church class, and found it interesting to compare our current divides with some of the early church (first few centuries) attitudes, and see where the young lady fits in.
| Her attitudes towards | American liberal thinks are | American conservative thinks are | Early church would think are |
| 1: Bible | Good | Good | Good |
| 2: Walker | Very BAD | Prob OK | Who cares? |
| 3: money | Good | Good | Bad wordly |
| 4: sex | Prob OK | Very BAD | Very Very BAD |
| 5: abortion | Bad | Good | Good |
| 6: self defense | Bad | OK | BAD |
| 7: punishment | Good | Bad | Don't cooperate |
Yes, I know, I can think of exceptions to some of the judgments among all three groups, but the descriptions are close enough.
So, where does the lady fit in? The second century church would want her to show an amended life for a year before they'd take her. I suppose the modern churches want her to amend her life too, but they disagree on what the amendation should be.
Of the three, in which would she be more likely to find the grace to amend her life?
3 comments:
Fascinating combination, and an excellent reminder that people do not fit categories easily. I quibble with two fills in your chart. I believe most liberals would find Bible-reading "probably bad," because there's a lot of it. They like dabbling and lip service. I also wonder whether the early church would have objected to self-defence that strenuously. Jesus taught going the extra mile, but his disciples were still carrying swords - more in case of robbers than soldiers, I believe. It was usual to go armed while traveling. I think you are right, but with a qualifier.
I think the lady does not follow politics closely, or she would be deeply likely to be moving one way or the other. I think she is moving from one group to the other, though I can't tell which. From what I know of young evangelicals, homosexuality is not a big issue to them, nor is premarital sex, so I will guess that she was an evangelical highschooler who is moving left in college, but retains some conservative contacts whom she continues to identify with.
She would be welcome in my current congregation if she grew up there or had some connection already, but if she were coming in cold might feel she would be judged. Regarding that last, people usually make some assessment whether they would be judged, even if no one actually says anything. The problem is, some are oversensitive, some undersensitive, and read the congregation wrong.
I should be clearer about the death penalty too: the early church (that covers a long time, so I'm going to get some of it wrong...) didn't want members to testify against someone accused of a capital crime.
I'm not closely involved with the youth groups, but I've heard that homosexuality is a big issue to some of them. Hard to be sure, because of self-selection of the samples.
In my congregation the only problem would be the pink hello kitty purse. Otherwise, she'd find someone to agree with just about everything, but no one person would agree with all.
More seriously, I feel very hopeful about her, because she's clearly trying to make sense of issues one at a time on terms that suit her sense of right and wrong, rather than adopting a whole set of opinions from a particular fashion. She won't be able to avoid having her conclusions questioned, because there's no such thing as a peer group that matches her.
Post a Comment