Outsider religious way versus seat of power

 The roots of the Jesus Movement to fulfill the teachings of YHWH center on houses of worshipers meeting secretly, since neither the Establishment of Jewish leaders, nor by extension the Roman occupiers wanted to see something that did not conform to peaceful social order and status quo. Later, the early church spread along the trade and transportation routes around the Mediterranean basin and attracted not only Jews far from Jerusalem's sway, but other God-fearers, as well as pagans - citizens of Rome, its slaves, and those from inside and outside the Empire.

The status of outlaw sect of Judaism changed overnight with the declaration by Constantine at the beginning of the 4th century C.E. that Christianity would be the State Religion of the Empire and that he would be its champion in the wide world (the Edict of Milan in 313, which declared tolerance for Christianity in the Roman Empire). His pledge to do this if YHWH would allow military victory thus was fulfilled after defeating the attackers at the battle of Milvian Bridge.

From now on the followers of The Way could own property, govern themselves openly, establish schools of learning and all the things that make a group of people an organization and perpetuate it until at last becoming a self-sustaining institution. Hierarchies grew, buildings were endowed, traditions of knowledge expanded, and doctrinal hairs were split ever more finely. With power comes corruption. Reforms came and sometimes gained traction. Sects splintered and power in the World grew bigger and bigger.

Importantly, Jesus answered Pilate by saying "my kingdom is not of this world." And a good deal of the meaning behind the phrase of the Lord's Prayer, "...Thy will be done; on Earth as in Heaven," is about one's own heart. That is, the Kingdom is not something standing on the surface of the planet, but instead dwells within each practitioner's own heart: the person's attitudes, habits of talking, strength of relationships, daily exercise of care for others, expressions of humility and also unshakeable faith, and so on. Therefore, the watershed begun with Constantine the Great to bring Christ-followers into the light of the world to freely worship and evangelize, is a mixed blessing and curse. The blessing is the reduction in persecution. The curse is the accumulating power, generation by generation, that imposes temptation and corruption.

Given the choice of fringe religion and mainstream institution, perhaps most would opt for today's model. But maybe there is a third way, neither institutionalized rigidity nor small-time desperation. Perhaps the sweetest form of The Way is to be in the World but not of the World; blessed by the material well-being and physical abundance that may be put to good use, but not redirected from stewardship of God's creation and distracted by stewardship of "stuff" bought or bequeathed from the faithful.

The question remains: can it still be Christianity when there is wealth and power and prominence involved?

Us versus Them restated as "we together"

Early August 2020 the guest on the weekly radio show, "On Being," was the poet Marilyn Nelson, in a rebroadcast of the original 2017 conversation with host Krista Tippett. She compares God seekers who expect to find God and God-at-work somewhere outside themselves ("magic mentality") to the people who see God at work in all places and times, including in their own selves ("alliance mentality").

Image search result for 'Marilyn Nelson poet' (8/2020)

Quoting the interview (full text link appended, below), she says:

I think people who have a “magic mentality” believe that God is something out there that we have to find to connect with and people who have an “alliance mentality” know that God is inside of us and in our connections with each other and with the world, that God exists within and between, not exterior to us, but within us and between us. I think that’s what he was trying to say... There is no separation. We are a part of God. That’s — isn’t that the ecstatic experience? We recognize that. And some people know that just naturally. Other people have to learn it. [emphasis added]

Other authors and thinkers from the Stewards of Earth tradition in Abrahamic religions have said something similar with regard to perceptions in public about "nature" versus society, or  "the natural world" ---as if the definition of "nature" consists of everything apart from human lives. Whereas industrialized, Western societies have cultivated an imaginary separation of human (cultural and technologically mediated) environment from all of the land and waters that people require to live, other societies have viewed the human/non-human boundary as much blurrier and movable. One instance of the "nature" concept being cut-off from human life comes from the translation into Japanese from the English concept of "nature." There was no exact pre-existing Japanese word, so a new one was coined, ShiZen (the kanji character 'shi' means "of itself" and 'zen' means something like "wild vitality").

In the particular phrase, above, "We are a part of God," there is a poetic double-meaning, or perhaps it is best described as ironic reflection. One meaning is "a part" or one of many pieces that all together contributes to the whole. Another meaning, this time a clever pun, is "apart" or separated from the rest. Taking the spoken word and transcribing it as "We are a part of God" means that we cannot be separated from God since we are integral to what and who and why God is. But taking the spoken word and transcribing it as "We are apart of God" means that we stand outside of God's ways and spend our waking hours seeking a way back in.

[from https://onbeing.org/programs/marilyn-nelson-communal-pondering-in-a-noisy-world/#transcript ]

Being foreign to this World - book of 1 Peter

screenshot from BibleGateway.com

Lots of wondering points came up in the weekly Bible reading of 1 Peter’s 2nd chapter. The list of bad behavior springing from who you are deep down reads like the reverse of “fruits of the spirit” that grow from seeking God’s Way. The NIV lists these terrible things as …” rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind.” And the Hawai’ian Pidgin verse gives …”No do no bad kine stuffs. No bulai nobody. No say one ting an do anodda. No get jealous. No talk stink notting.” Still another voice (E. Peterson’s The Message), …”Make a clean sweep of malice and pretense, envy and hurtful talk..” here is the link to those comparative verses at BibleGateway dotcom.

Since Peter’s letter is addressing house-churches far from Jerusalem with mixed congregations of Jews and Gentiles, perhaps some of those attending were in the habit of sorting their peers into who is more holy or righteous or closer to God than the others; for example, would it not be natural to project onto the Jews a bit more affinity to the legacies of Rabbi Jesus? How is this human habit addressed in the followers of The Way?

In languages spoken and written today, often there is a distinction between spoken and written version of the language, since the voice, face, and context all contribute to conversational interchange, but only punctuation marks and word order can speak on the written page. So the many iterations of Bible verses and also the letters circulated to early churches would have been the stiff style of written, not spoken teachings, right? And when the Greek source texts later went into Latin or all the vernacular languages, then this formal style was conserved, right? But to have lived in the presence and preaching, teaching, healing and blessing of Jesus or his nearest contemporaries and companions would have been all in the spoken voice; not the thundering cadences of KJV, for instance - beauteous though it was frames in the early 1600s. How ever could one go about reconstituting the conversational style of the teachings, parables, etc?