Reconciliation's Challenge for New Monastic Communities (by Jason and Vonetta Storbakken)
[see all posts in this conversation on New Monastics and race.]
In August 2006, before having ever heard the term "new monasticism," my husband, Jason, and I founded Radical Living, an intentional community in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York. When I (Vonetta) was 12 years old, I emigrated from Guyana to Bed-Stuy, one of the poorest and most violent neighborhoods in New York City. I witnessed firsthand urban decay -- and renewal -- as well as the devastating effects of the crack epidemic.
Some of our neighbors, many of whom I have known since I was young, have been afflicted by drug addiction and poverty. They are not merely the nameless, faceless people you might read about or pass on the street. They are living souls made in the image of God. When a person applies for membership at Radical Living we explain that we want to live in community with people who desire to invest in the lives of their neighbors, regardless of their position in society. We are not interested in living with "tourists" who want to "experience the ghetto."
My husband and I are an interracial couple with a baby daughter, and it is important to us that our community, regardless of the predominant culture around us, is centered in Jesus and reflective of the diversity of the kingdom of God. Although our community -- 17 people who live in three houses around one block -- is blessed with diversity, we have a lot of work to do with regard to racial reconciliation. There are African Americans, Asians, immigrants, and first-generation Americans, and more than half our community are white folks. Although not as representative of our neighborhood as we could be, due to the rainbow of voices in our community we regularly discuss the role of minorities in the New Monastic movement. It is also due to these voices that we know how much work we have to do.
The key players in New Monasticism have made important strides in raising awareness of issues pertinent to disenfranchised members of our society, yet these leaders often make some of the same mistakes as their conservative counterparts. One of the 12 marks of New Monasticism is the "lament for racial divisions within the church and our communities, combined with the active pursuit of a just reconciliation." Although most do "lament" the racial divisions in our society, one is hard-pressed to find a leader in New Monasticism who is not a middle-class white male. However, the problem is not with their class, color, or gender, but that there has yet to be an "active pursuit" of reconciliation realized within the myriad of intentional communities that have sprouted across the U.S. And after some good private conversations with some those leaders, we agreed to open a public dialogue about this issue because by their very natures both this conversation and this movement aren't just about a handful of leaders. It's about every member of every community who needs to actively seek reconciliation.
Another of the 12 marks is to relocate "to the abandoned places of Empire." New Monastics have done this quite well. But sadly, years -- and sometimes decades -- after an intentional community has been planted in a minority neighborhood, the community's membership continues to remain predominantly (if not exclusively) white. What are the reasons for the membership to remain so homogenous? One thing is for certain: The idea of "us and them" is perpetuated when an intentional community does not actively seek to diversify its membership.
New Monastic communities need to be redemptive communities where all, regardless of ethnicity, national identity, or economic status, are invited to participate in the communal rhythm of Christian living. As Eliacin Rosario-Cruz, a friend and fellow communitarian, recently said, "The current wave of New Monasticism needs the life and spirit that minorities bring because it is a more complete expression of what the kingdom is, not the other way around."
The current generation of progressive Christians has done amazing work in broadening the social agenda among evangelicals, but now it's time that we trust what our hearts and minds believe and actively pursue the reconciliation we talk about. The next step, rather than being a voice for the "voiceless," is to hand the mic over to indigenous community leaders and ask them to facilitate the conversation so that we might grow and deepen in relationship with one another and with God.
Every one of us in this movement needs to plead with God to make us ministers of reconciliation. We must pray for eyes to see the structural racism perpetuated by unjust policies and a shared history of colonialism and slavery. Some of us will need to repent of inaction and empty rhetoric. Others simply need to heed what the Lord is already speaking. All of us will need to affirm affirmative action in our communal houses, and actively pursue reconciliation.
We are hopeful that the New Monastic movement will be a diverse, Christ-centered, Spirit-led movement. And if all of us in this conversation will extend transparency, grace, and love to one another, we will surely disable the structural racism that has infected the church for far too long. And then we will be able to truly proclaim Jubilee!
Jason and Vonetta Storbakken are cofounders of Radical Living. Learn more about their community in this article in the New York Press.
[see all posts in this conversation on New Monastics and race.]
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
Handing over the mic represents a hurdle that I many (myself included) find challenging. One of the frustrations I sense in US emergent/progressive circles is that despite all the talk of opening up the kingdom via "grassroots initiatives," the end result so far has been a cottage growth industry of nonprofits, conferences and the like. Once again, those in charge position themselves as the spokesmen. I'm tried to attending gatherings that claim to be diverse but yet when I walk into the room, the people in attendance tend to be predominately male, white with the bulk of those in attendance possessing an masters degree of above. (In some progressive circles, you'll find a higher percentage of women and a bit more racial diversity but the groups still tend to be pretty well educated).
Why do we set up initiatives to help "the least of these" and then not invite them to our gatherings, conferences, etc.? It's time we all started demanding that when we gather together in His name that we reflect His people. Otherwise, all our talk about unifying the church, it just that ... talk.
Thanks again for starting to walk the walk and challenging us all to join in.
Posted by: becky | August 29, 2008 5:28 PM
The Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., observation continues, "it is appalling that the most segregated hour of Christian America is eleven o'clock on Sunday morning."
I never thought about this ongoing segregation, even in new monastic communities, among folks who are seemingly more open to the "beloved community."
May the Spirit fall upon us, working the miracle of fashioning us into one Body. Amen.
Treasured people, treasure people,
Duh-sciple
Posted by: Duh-sciple | August 29, 2008 5:33 PM
Great post. I'm in the process of joining and building a monastic/intentional non-residential community, and this is a really intriguing and challenging issue...
I'm also a part of a multifaith, multiracial community a volunteers that support people with HIV/AIDS. It's much more like the utopian vision of "Church" than any actual church I've been a part of. Nothing unites like a common and indiscriminate cause. The idea of "handing over the mic" is so important. In my experience, the 'voiceless' can generally speak for themselves quite eloquently and convincingly. Rather than making such an effort to be a 'voice' for them, we white middle-class power-center types who are devoted to community really need to work on being an 'ear'.
Peace,
Tim
Posted by: Tim Mathis | August 29, 2008 5:38 PM
Good luck to you and to all those sweet 'living souls' you are guiding. The microphone has been in the hands of manipulative, self-serving, domineering powermongers far too long. I like what you wrote about "us and them."
Posted by: Cheryl Spencer from Lewes, Delaware | August 30, 2008 9:09 AM
Glad to see this article after hearing about difficulties in getting it published before! Perhaps one of the most difficult things about being a part of the Church is that we must listen to the personal criticisms of other parts of the body of Christ. I pray that we all continue to reach out in loving ways when we expose times we've been hurt. I pray also that when others come to us with criticisms, we might learn caring ways to understand that they indicate times when someone has been hurt and that they indicate changes we must make in order to better reflect God's love. Pain is all around, especially when it comes to cross cultural, pan-SES, and interracial relations, but we MUST find ways to let LOVE shine more brightly!
In response to the idea of "inviting them to our gatherings," though, I challenge more people to join church communities and go to conferences lead by groups that are of a different demographic than their own. It is not enough to wait for others to be brave and be the different ones. We all must be willing to go into unfamiliar social scenes and recognize that God is there just as much as God is in places we are familiar with.
Shalom!
Posted by: Greg | August 31, 2008 3:05 PM
Greg - re: conferences led by "the least of these" - they don't have the resources to host a conference nor could they afford to attend such an event. Heck, I can't afford the time and money to attend much of what crosses my desk (not to mention the fact that I've started to really rethink my carbon footprint, so when I travel, I try to multitask so I stay say a week or two in a place instead of making two trips).
I definitely agree with you in that we all must be willing to venture outside of our comfort zone and venture into unfamiliar territory. For example, instead of hosting a conference where going to be yet another gathering of college educated progressives where the line-up remains very similar (you can go from conference to conference and get your head all filled with great thoughts without ever getting your hands dirty), why not participate in a say neighborhood block parties or whatever else is happening in the local churches/communities instead of trying to create yet another nonprofit replete with select spokesmen available to go on speaking tours?
As Bono said when he spoke at the Presidential Prayer Breakfast, "Stop asking God to bless what you're doing. Get involved in what God is doing—because it's already blessed."
Posted by: becky | August 31, 2008 3:57 PM
Great post, Becky. I agree 100%.
Posted by: Austin | September 1, 2008 1:15 PM
Excellent article. One comment and one question.
The comment goes something like this. I totally agree with your insight. As a Pastor, I struggle in this sort of racial homoginization on a regular basis. I would quickly add that economics plays an influential role as well. Church communities seem infatuated with preserving a culture that conforms to their own economic kind--usually middle class and all the amenities (and trappings) that go along with such a lifestyle.
Now the question. I'm interested in joining an intentional community like the one described (or helping to create one). Any suggestions?
Posted by: Peter John Smith | September 2, 2008 10:44 AM
America wears me out.
Thank GOD I don't live in a country where race is the ONLY issue that matters - not character, not hard work, not morals, not experience, not kindness, not principle.
Consider the election - Americans "don't know" Obama.
Yet, in 3 days, they 'Know" Sarah Palin.
Apart from the fact that she is white, what else is there to KNOW about OBAMA? The woman could be a Communist, living so close to RUSSIA, but Americans, "KNOW" her.
Thank GOD i live in the greatest country on earth - MY OWN.
Posted by: Alecia Raniba | September 2, 2008 1:11 PM
That seems a bit of an over-reaction, Alecia. Anytime someone responds with a big dismissal, it is hard to take anything they say in a helpful way.
Posted by: Mark Van Steenwyk | September 2, 2008 2:10 PM
Great article. Thanks.
Posted by: Kai | September 2, 2008 4:46 PM
My family moved into one of the poorest neighborhoods of our city 21 years ago to start a church. I'm a white guy from privilege. We've had lots of ups and downs trying to be intentionally, genuinely diverse and to empower our community. Mostly failure. We know lots of ways not to do things.
Our greatest teachers these past few years have been those in recovery. Their meetings (AA, CA, etc) are astonishingly diverse, powerful community occurs, and poor, illiterate, and deeply broken folks help lead them. Through them I got in touch with my own brokenness in a new and profound way. How, Why, we asked.
For one, their meetings and whole structure is so simple, anyone who has hung around for a while could lead them. The way we did things, it took strong literacy and institutional leadership skills - that pushed the poor away from leading.
Secondly, the 12 steps (based on a Christian discipleship movement) level the field because everyone confesses their brokenness and weakness, and all of us look to Jesus for help.
We've begun to weave these things into our community. The interesting thing is that folks of color, the generationally poor, and the disabled are now starting to lead us.
I don't know if these things are the "missing links" for us. But it's been a huge help for us.
Posted by: Dennis Hesselbarth | September 4, 2008 5:25 PM
Hello, thank you very much for your article.
I am curious about the issue one commentator brought up around the difficulty of publishing this article--why?
Perhaps that doesn't matter, however after reading your article I had some concerns not only regarding the article but also Shane Claiborne's response to the article.
First is that the article mentions that the authors spoke with the white, middle-class male 'leaders' of the new monasticism movement, but failed to mention speaking to other folks in the new monasticism movement who ARE obvious leaders but are not white, middle-class males--including and starting with the spouses of these leaders? If both the authors of the article as well as those they are speaking of wanted to challenge the power dynamic inherent in these communities I would expect at least a mention of how those from non-white, middle class, male backgrounds are coping with living in mostly white communities? What have been the conversations around race and privilege within the community?
Additionally, I feel that Shane Claiborne's follow-up articles do the things he says he is not trying to do, which is to 'handle' the criticism to make it look like the communities are doing the very best that they can towards reconciliation, which is the very heart of the Storbakkens' criticism (that there is little or no ACTIVE reconciliation besides lament). I feel that in this way Claiborne (though he might not feel it is intentional) is undercutting the very nature of the Storbakkens' critique.
I understand racism as an addiction, and thus it must be 'treated' in a similar way as we treat many other kinds of addictions---where first the addict needs to come out of denial of his/her addiction. I think there is a heavy dose of denial among progressive whites, even those that are genuinely attempting to be ardent disciples of Jesus (like Claiborne), to admit to their power within communities like the New Monasticism, and I see the addiction to racism to be (in a deep sense) an addiction to power, and I sense that the things Claiborne claims in his follow up are distractions away from admitting what is really going on within these communities in terms of reconciling what the Storbakkens are talking about--and just as an example of this Claiborne mentions turning down invitations to speak at conferences without women and people of color, but does not mention why there is not a mention in the marks new monasticism (which Claiborne amongst many others helped to author) about the lament for sexism within the church.
Now, I don't want to focus entirely on Claiborne, there are many including Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo, Brian McLaren, etc. that are also responsible for their parts in, by intentionality or not, not leaving space for a different perspective and ultimately a different make-up of leadership in certain parts of the progressive left.
Posted by: Sarah | September 4, 2008 7:02 PM
As one (of Scandanavian heritage) who has been part of intentional Christian Community for more than 25 years, I have come up with some hypotheses for the difficulty in getting non-caucasian members. When we come from a position of privilege, we can give up some of the benefits of that position and choose simplicity, knowing we are able to move back to a comfortable middle class lifestlye if we want. Those from a position of being poor and exploited are more apt to dream of achieving middle class, and may find it harder and less attractive to not choose to try to gain equality.
Also non-white activists are more likely to be mostly concerned with the welfare of their oppressed group. While we may care, we probably won't be as focused on one particular concern.
I am only suggesting these represent tendencies; I could also present the rare counter-example.
Posted by: Jim Foxvog | September 4, 2008 10:41 PM
Thank you, Vonetta and Jason, for nurturing this conversation. May we all be led, and may we each learn to listen - not just to hear, not just to "dialogue." That's the challenge I feel. BTW, this excerpt from Paolo Freire expresses (better than I could) the struggle at hand.
"Discovering himself to be an oppressor, an individual may experience considerable anguish, but it does not necessarily lead to solidarity with the oppressed. Rationalizing his guilt through paternalistic treatment of the oppressed, all the while holding them fast in a position of dependence, will not do. Solidarity requires that one enter into the situation of those with whom one is in solidarity; it is a radical posture. If what characterizes the oppressed is their subordination to the consciousness of the master, as Hegel affirms, true solidarity with the oppressed means fighting at their side to transform the objective reality which has made them these “beings for another”. The oppressor is in solidarity with the oppressed only when he stops regarding the oppressed as an abstract category and sees them as persons who have been unjustly dealt with, deprived of their voice, cheated in the sale of their labor - when he stops making pious, sentimental, and individualistic gestures and risks an act of love. True solidarity is found only in the plenitude of this act of love, in its existentiality in its praxis. To affirm that men and women are persons and as persons should be free, and yet to do nothing tangible to make this affirmation a reality, is a farce."
¬Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed
Posted by: Chris | September 12, 2008 12:25 PM
Nearly 40 years ago I left a comfortable and familiar home turf to work for the Indian Health Service in New Mexico. I had never met a native American person, had only known one African American (who, in retrospect, was not really very typical) and graduated from a pharmacy school that was 100% caucasian. The NM hospital where I worked served primarily Navajo people but also other native Americans from the region. I saw it as an outreach to a needy people. My location segregated me from the lives of the Navajo people; however, it was possible to gain some insight into their culture. What I learned from this experience was that we may wish to reach out and help others in need but they must want what we are offering. I saw the need as gaining knowledge for better health, but I think most of the local people saw only an opportunity for jobs so that they could "buy into" the materialistic culture that is so pervasive in our society. Due to the tribal culture and language barriers, it was extremely difficult to be a part of the Navajo community. And the Navajo people were not very interested in assimilating into the rest of the local culture. They needed their pickups to get around and liked the satelite TV dishes that enabled them to see the outside world (I guess), but were still very much isolated from the rest of the non-native American culture. Perhaps this has changed, but I doubt that significant changes will happen quickly.
We are a society that wants to see things happen now - instant gratification is the norm. I believe we, as Christians, must be very careful to avoid making this "our goal" instead of God's plan. How are we to fit into God's plan, and how is His plan (on earth) to be manifest, are better questions than many being asked. As the elder involved in mission and evangelism in our church, I wonder about the fact that we are an all-caucasian membership, but realize that there are different styles of worship. People will try to find a place where they are comfortable and can participate fully in the experience. I am not comfortable and thus cannot feel free to worship in an environment that is totally foreign to me - and I am not sure why anyone needs to attempt that. We each need to find God and establish a personal relationship via our own journey and ask what God would have us do with our talents, abilities and resources. We must be obedient to the Spirit's guidance in these matters. I hear the word reconciliation used here very often but it is something I have trouble connecting with personally. Those who feel called to a ministry of reconciliation do have a daunting challenge, but not all of us are called to this ministry.
We educated folks will intellectualize this topic forever, resulting in some interesting conversations. However, it is impossible to go back to our uneducated past, or to entirely empathize with those who have experienced life in a much different way. The community we immerse ourselves in needs to be an encouraging and loving community that will equip each one of us to go out into this world and minister, as we are called, without being "of this world."
For what journey have you been equipped?
Posted by: Steve | September 16, 2008 10:53 AM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?