Comments on: Christian Politics and the False Dichotomy of Sacred and Secular http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2006/04/christian-politics-and-the-false-dichotomy-of-sacred-and-secular/ exploring the mystery of life and mission as one and the same Fri, 11 May 2012 20:06:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: lifeasmission » Let Me Try Again http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2006/04/christian-politics-and-the-false-dichotomy-of-sacred-and-secular/comment-page-1/#comment-160 lifeasmission » Let Me Try Again Wed, 12 Apr 2006 06:09:26 +0000 http://lifeasmission.com/blog/?p=177#comment-160 [...] Posted by jrrozko on 12 Apr 2006 at 05:57 am | Tagged as: decisions, church, blogging, music, culture A few days ago I posted something about, among other things, the false dichotomy of sacred and secular. After my friend Josh made some helpful observations, I thought it might be beneficial to try and clarify what I was after. [...] [...] Posted by jrrozko on 12 Apr 2006 at 05:57 am | Tagged as: decisions, church, blogging, music, culture A few days ago I posted something about, among other things, the false dichotomy of sacred and secular. After my friend Josh made some helpful observations, I thought it might be beneficial to try and clarify what I was after. [...]

]]> By: lifeasmission » Let Me Try Again http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2006/04/christian-politics-and-the-false-dichotomy-of-sacred-and-secular/comment-page-1/#comment-159 lifeasmission » Let Me Try Again Wed, 12 Apr 2006 05:40:12 +0000 http://lifeasmission.com/blog/?p=177#comment-159 [...] Posted by jrrozko on 12 Apr 2006 at 05:39 am | Tagged as: decisions, church, blogging, music, culture A few days ago I posted something about, among other things, the false dichotomy of sacred and secular.  After my friend Josh made some helpful observations, I thought it might be beneficial to try and clarify what I was after.  [...] [...] Posted by jrrozko on 12 Apr 2006 at 05:39 am | Tagged as: decisions, church, blogging, music, culture A few days ago I posted something about, among other things, the false dichotomy of sacred and secular.  After my friend Josh made some helpful observations, I thought it might be beneficial to try and clarify what I was after.  [...]

]]> By: Sam Andress http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2006/04/christian-politics-and-the-false-dichotomy-of-sacred-and-secular/comment-page-1/#comment-156 Sam Andress Sun, 09 Apr 2006 01:02:36 +0000 http://lifeasmission.com/blog/?p=177#comment-156 very nice post J.R.! You encapsulate a very; Hauerwasian-Newbiginian-Guderish-Wrightian, not to mention biblcial theo-missio-ecclesi-ology:). peace. very nice post J.R.! You encapsulate a very; Hauerwasian-Newbiginian-Guderish-Wrightian, not to mention biblcial theo-missio-ecclesi-ology:).

peace.

]]> By: Joshua http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2006/04/christian-politics-and-the-false-dichotomy-of-sacred-and-secular/comment-page-1/#comment-152 Joshua Fri, 07 Apr 2006 13:12:20 +0000 http://lifeasmission.com/blog/?p=177#comment-152 Well, I agree. We should be on terms with whether or not issues are God-honoring or life-giving (what does life-giving mean anyway?). But this assumes exactly what you are claiming does not exist... namely the difference between the sacred and the secular. The sacred thing is that which is God-honoring. The secular thing is that which is not God-honoring. So, it appears as though we agree that there actually is a difference between the sacred and the secular, and we agree that this difference does not obey the labels we place on larger conglomerations. Just because we claim that politics is secular does not mean it has no element of the sacred. And just because we claim that Christian movement is sacred does not mean it contains no elements of the secular. What we conclude then is not that there is no difference between the sacred and the secular, but rather, that the sacred and the secular are both very different things, and the world around us is a moxy bag of both. It is our job to find the sacred in everything, and to make the secular, more sacred. Is that what we're getting at? Or am I putting words in your mouth? (I think this is a classic example of two people saying the same thing, but being stuck on phrasing it in different ways.) Well, I agree. We should be on terms with whether or not issues are God-honoring or life-giving (what does life-giving mean anyway?). But this assumes exactly what you are claiming does not exist… namely the difference between the sacred and the secular. The sacred thing is that which is God-honoring. The secular thing is that which is not God-honoring. So, it appears as though we agree that there actually is a difference between the sacred and the secular, and we agree that this difference does not obey the labels we place on larger conglomerations. Just because we claim that politics is secular does not mean it has no element of the sacred. And just because we claim that Christian movement is sacred does not mean it contains no elements of the secular. What we conclude then is not that there is no difference between the sacred and the secular, but rather, that the sacred and the secular are both very different things, and the world around us is a moxy bag of both. It is our job to find the sacred in everything, and to make the secular, more sacred.

Is that what we’re getting at? Or am I putting words in your mouth? (I think this is a classic example of two people saying the same thing, but being stuck on phrasing it in different ways.)

]]> By: jrrozko http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2006/04/christian-politics-and-the-false-dichotomy-of-sacred-and-secular/comment-page-1/#comment-148 jrrozko Thu, 06 Apr 2006 00:27:12 +0000 http://lifeasmission.com/blog/?p=177#comment-148 Maybe we have a semantic issue. Indeed, what I meant to say was that I do not believe in the two worlds of sacred and secular. If these worlds existed how would we know the difference? The easiest way to see this is in the common example of music. What makes some music sacred and other music secular? The label the group signs with, the confession of a majority of the members of the band, the content of the songs? There are obviously flaws with all three ways. Or, to go back to the issue of leadership - is someone a Christian/sacred leader because he/she prays before making decisions or becasue he/she goes about her task in a Christian/sacred environment? This is why I call it a false dichotomy. Instead, I would propose approaching issues such as music, leadership, community, architecture, politics, books, etc., not as either sacred or secular (a side to be on), but in terms of whether or not they are God-honoring or life-giving (a scale on which to move). Granted, this does not necessarily solve the problem of subjectivity, but neither does the first method and at least this way we're more open minded to God working in unexpected places and in unexpected ways. Yes, the black and white version of JR continues to die a torturous death! Maybe we have a semantic issue. Indeed, what I meant to say was that I do not believe in the two worlds of sacred and secular. If these worlds existed how would we know the difference? The easiest way to see this is in the common example of music. What makes some music sacred and other music secular? The label the group signs with, the confession of a majority of the members of the band, the content of the songs? There are obviously flaws with all three ways. Or, to go back to the issue of leadership – is someone a Christian/sacred leader because he/she prays before making decisions or becasue he/she goes about her task in a Christian/sacred environment?

This is why I call it a false dichotomy. Instead, I would propose approaching issues such as music, leadership, community, architecture, politics, books, etc., not as either sacred or secular (a side to be on), but in terms of whether or not they are God-honoring or life-giving (a scale on which to move). Granted, this does not necessarily solve the problem of subjectivity, but neither does the first method and at least this way we’re more open minded to God working in unexpected places and in unexpected ways. Yes, the black and white version of JR continues to die a torturous death!

]]> By: Joshua http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2006/04/christian-politics-and-the-false-dichotomy-of-sacred-and-secular/comment-page-1/#comment-147 Joshua Wed, 05 Apr 2006 19:25:09 +0000 http://lifeasmission.com/blog/?p=177#comment-147 I worry a bit about saying something like: "There is no difference between sacred and secular." There is a huge difference, that I know you are aware of. There can be mixtures of the sacred and the profance. (I.E. the cross.) but these things are reformed, and sanctified by the sacred. They are not sacred in and of themselves, they are glorified by the beauty of God. There is a vast chasm separating the sacred and the secular. However, this chasm is crossable. The danger that we face when we distinguish the sacred from the secular is the developement of a false sense of security with the sacred. The "sacred" world is not always a safe place. And the "secular" world is not always a dangerous place. (I'm thinking now of music, movies, magazines... etc...) Sacred music, sacred church, sacred movies, these things are not inherintly "safe" places for us. These things can just as easily lie to us as their "secular" counterparts. To sum up a rambling comment: there are two worlds, the sacred and the secular. However, those lines are not always as easily drawn as we might like to think. Fortunately, all this means is that we have to continue being critical students of the world around us. And we have to continue spreading the sacred around. I worry a bit about saying something like: “There is no difference between sacred and secular.” There is a huge difference, that I know you are aware of. There can be mixtures of the sacred and the profance. (I.E. the cross.) but these things are reformed, and sanctified by the sacred. They are not sacred in and of themselves, they are glorified by the beauty of God. There is a vast chasm separating the sacred and the secular. However, this chasm is crossable. The danger that we face when we distinguish the sacred from the secular is the developement of a false sense of security with the sacred. The “sacred” world is not always a safe place. And the “secular” world is not always a dangerous place. (I’m thinking now of music, movies, magazines… etc…) Sacred music, sacred church, sacred movies, these things are not inherintly “safe” places for us. These things can just as easily lie to us as their “secular” counterparts.

To sum up a rambling comment: there are two worlds, the sacred and the secular. However, those lines are not always as easily drawn as we might like to think. Fortunately, all this means is that we have to continue being critical students of the world around us. And we have to continue spreading the sacred around.

]]> By: Gina Tamburro http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2006/04/christian-politics-and-the-false-dichotomy-of-sacred-and-secular/comment-page-1/#comment-145 Gina Tamburro Tue, 04 Apr 2006 13:30:07 +0000 http://lifeasmission.com/blog/?p=177#comment-145 Nice blog! I enjoyed it. Nice blog! I enjoyed it.

]]>