Migration has been an important topic du jour in missiology and in broader news and policy discussions. Often such discussions refer to the "migration crisis." While the harmful effects of forced migration especially should not be ignored but rather taken seriously by Christians and policy-makers alike, two recent articles make the argument that it is important to go beyond seeing migration as just a crisis or a problem to be solved.
In their recent New World Outlook article "The Development of Faith During Migration," Michael Nausner and Tsaurayi Kudakwashe Mapfeka seek to shift views of migration from the negative to the neutral. They write, "We, the authors of this article, believe that migration is not necessarily a crisis to fight but a basic living condition that has existed since humans first populated this planet." Moreover, this "basic living condition" has special significant for Christians. A careful reading of the Bible, they assert, will yield "a migratory understanding of Christian identity."
In the same issue of New World Outlook, Thomas Kemper goes a step further by arguing that migration can be seen not just as a given fact of Christianity, but as a positive force in Christian history. Accordingly, he titles his article "Migration as Blessing." In it, he traces the important contributions migration has made to Christianity, especially in the realm of mission.
Dedicated to fostering conversations about the global nature of The United Methodist Church
Showing posts with label Michael Nausner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Nausner. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 27, 2016
Thursday, March 24, 2016
Michael Nausner: The Need of a New Cultural Imagination in Times of Migration
Today's post is by regular contributor Dr. Michael Nausner, Professor of Theology, Prorektor, and Dean of International Affairs at the Reutlingen School of Theology.
Changing Conditions
We live in times of global migration. Migration of course has always been a basic human condition, but the visibility of migrating and fleeing people has increased dramatically since the summer of 2015 in Germany and in many other places in Europe. By the end of the year roughly a million refugees had made their way into Germany alone. I interpret this situation not so much as a sudden crisis that has erupted due to a war, but as an expression of years, decades, and centuries of colonial rule, unjust economic relations, and cultural imperialism.
Whatever our analysis of the reasons of this sudden presence of many refugees may be, we have now reached a stage in which not only the media is full of reports and stories about refugees all over Europe, but we are encountering them on a daily basis on the streets, in the supermarkets, and in public buildings. This means that we are now experiencing with new intensity the inequalities in our global community that have been a reality for a long time.
My hope is that this new visibility eventually turns into a realization that a change of lifestyle in the global west is needed, and into an awareness that we more than ever live in a global and planetary community in which we are mutually dependent of each other. At certain instances such a change of mindset can be noticed already, not least in Methodist congregations in Austria and Germany. Also students and faculty at Reutlingen School of Theology – a United Methodist related institution – are actively involved in having table fellowship with and teaching German to refugees from Eritrea and Syria. Regular eye contact is an effective medicine against stereotypical imagination of the others.
As time is passing I also notice in media and in everyday life an increasing anxiety and aggressiveness aimed at refugees. The horrors at the borders of Macedonia are only one symptom of such anxiety. They are signs of toughening attitudes that win out over human dignity and human rights. But crimes against refugees exceed the crimes committed by refugees both in terms of numbers and severity. Nevertheless the terminology used in the media to describe such large numbers of human beings on the move has been increasingly inflammatory. Downfall of the occident is just one of these allegedly descriptive terms. The result in the imagination of the general public often is a generalization of “the refugees” and what they are about as well as a tendency toward polarizing asylum seekers and the sedentary population, or even worse: asylum seekers and disadvantaged citizens as necessarily in competition with each other.
Under such conditions I believe that the Christian community is called to contribute to a re-imagination of cultural identity. And the global Methodist connection can play a pivotal role in such a re-imagination. Standing in the Jewish-Christian tradition, it has decisive resources to offer in situations of quickly changing cultural conditions. It can help in the struggle for new narratives in order to develop new strategies of encountering our new “others” with dignity.
The Need of New Narratives
Europe in the last decade or so has developed a very worrisome re-nationalization, in part due to the steady influx of refugees (both inner- and outer-European) and the increasing number of asylum seekers. Old stereotypes about “pure heritage” and the possibility (and alleged necessity) of clear cut distinction lines between cultural spheres are en vogue again. The symbolism we surround ourselves with in the European countries (and in a kind of mutual mirror effect in neighboring countries as well) oftentimes is one of old dreams of superiority. Such symbolism triggers narratives in Europe that are detrimental to a constructive view of current social and cultural conditions.
The warrior on the horse is a case in point. Especially since the sudden rise of Muslim refugees coming to the EU in late 2015 the message of the old visual representations becomes problematic. When a new Europe tries to emerge, falling back on old imaginations is counterproductive. In times of rising tensions between Turkey and the EU the prominence of equestrian statues such as the one of pasha Mehmet II, the conqueror of Constantinople in 1453, and king Ian Sobieski III, the “liberator of Europe” from the Turks in 1683, becomes increasingly problematic. They mirror each other in terms of exclusive territorial and cultural claims in times when the cultural realms are as intimately intertwined as never before.
The constructed nature of such imaginations is easily forgotten when conflicts arise. Do we not risk these days to fall back into the simplifying narratives of the past in which one cultural sphere militantly opposes another one?
Instead a theologically rooted conviction that belonging to different cultures/worlds is part of what it means to be human may be one of the ways in which Methodists around the world could contribute to a more constructive view of the coexistence between human beings on the move and human beings in sheltered conditions. After all a rapidly increasing number of people know themselves to belong to different worlds. But do we have the imagination; do we have good narratives to accommodate such double or multiple belonging?
Belonging to Different Worlds
A theological view of the human being and of human community shows a certain analogy to cultural multiple belonging in as much as Christians through the ages have understood themselves not only to belong to the societal community of everyday life but simultaneously also to a spiritual community that exceeds tangible social connections. There is in other words a certain metaphorical doubleness of Christian existence. Christians are not only members of a certain social group, but always also members of the household of God. Christians are not only citizens of a certain nation, but always also citizens of God’s kingdom. A rethinking of Christian identity as a double identity in the deepest existential sense may help toward a re-imagination of our migratory situation, and it may facilitate new forms of participation with migrants who painfully experience a certain doubleness on a daily basis.
The Second Century Letter to Diognetus is an early Christian document describing such existential double belonging of Christians in very concrete terms: “They live in their own countries, but only as aliens. They have a share in everything as citizens, and endure everything as foreigners. […] They busy themselves on earth, but their citizenship is in heaven.”
The tension between being citizen and foreigner simultaneously – metaphorically speaking – needs to be maintained in the life of Christians. I believe a rethinking of such theological understanding of belonging to two worlds can stir our imagination in positive ways in a social situation in which migrants are denied a double belonging.
Changing Conditions
We live in times of global migration. Migration of course has always been a basic human condition, but the visibility of migrating and fleeing people has increased dramatically since the summer of 2015 in Germany and in many other places in Europe. By the end of the year roughly a million refugees had made their way into Germany alone. I interpret this situation not so much as a sudden crisis that has erupted due to a war, but as an expression of years, decades, and centuries of colonial rule, unjust economic relations, and cultural imperialism.
Whatever our analysis of the reasons of this sudden presence of many refugees may be, we have now reached a stage in which not only the media is full of reports and stories about refugees all over Europe, but we are encountering them on a daily basis on the streets, in the supermarkets, and in public buildings. This means that we are now experiencing with new intensity the inequalities in our global community that have been a reality for a long time.
My hope is that this new visibility eventually turns into a realization that a change of lifestyle in the global west is needed, and into an awareness that we more than ever live in a global and planetary community in which we are mutually dependent of each other. At certain instances such a change of mindset can be noticed already, not least in Methodist congregations in Austria and Germany. Also students and faculty at Reutlingen School of Theology – a United Methodist related institution – are actively involved in having table fellowship with and teaching German to refugees from Eritrea and Syria. Regular eye contact is an effective medicine against stereotypical imagination of the others.
As time is passing I also notice in media and in everyday life an increasing anxiety and aggressiveness aimed at refugees. The horrors at the borders of Macedonia are only one symptom of such anxiety. They are signs of toughening attitudes that win out over human dignity and human rights. But crimes against refugees exceed the crimes committed by refugees both in terms of numbers and severity. Nevertheless the terminology used in the media to describe such large numbers of human beings on the move has been increasingly inflammatory. Downfall of the occident is just one of these allegedly descriptive terms. The result in the imagination of the general public often is a generalization of “the refugees” and what they are about as well as a tendency toward polarizing asylum seekers and the sedentary population, or even worse: asylum seekers and disadvantaged citizens as necessarily in competition with each other.
Under such conditions I believe that the Christian community is called to contribute to a re-imagination of cultural identity. And the global Methodist connection can play a pivotal role in such a re-imagination. Standing in the Jewish-Christian tradition, it has decisive resources to offer in situations of quickly changing cultural conditions. It can help in the struggle for new narratives in order to develop new strategies of encountering our new “others” with dignity.
The Need of New Narratives
Europe in the last decade or so has developed a very worrisome re-nationalization, in part due to the steady influx of refugees (both inner- and outer-European) and the increasing number of asylum seekers. Old stereotypes about “pure heritage” and the possibility (and alleged necessity) of clear cut distinction lines between cultural spheres are en vogue again. The symbolism we surround ourselves with in the European countries (and in a kind of mutual mirror effect in neighboring countries as well) oftentimes is one of old dreams of superiority. Such symbolism triggers narratives in Europe that are detrimental to a constructive view of current social and cultural conditions.
The warrior on the horse is a case in point. Especially since the sudden rise of Muslim refugees coming to the EU in late 2015 the message of the old visual representations becomes problematic. When a new Europe tries to emerge, falling back on old imaginations is counterproductive. In times of rising tensions between Turkey and the EU the prominence of equestrian statues such as the one of pasha Mehmet II, the conqueror of Constantinople in 1453, and king Ian Sobieski III, the “liberator of Europe” from the Turks in 1683, becomes increasingly problematic. They mirror each other in terms of exclusive territorial and cultural claims in times when the cultural realms are as intimately intertwined as never before.
The constructed nature of such imaginations is easily forgotten when conflicts arise. Do we not risk these days to fall back into the simplifying narratives of the past in which one cultural sphere militantly opposes another one?
Instead a theologically rooted conviction that belonging to different cultures/worlds is part of what it means to be human may be one of the ways in which Methodists around the world could contribute to a more constructive view of the coexistence between human beings on the move and human beings in sheltered conditions. After all a rapidly increasing number of people know themselves to belong to different worlds. But do we have the imagination; do we have good narratives to accommodate such double or multiple belonging?
Belonging to Different Worlds
A theological view of the human being and of human community shows a certain analogy to cultural multiple belonging in as much as Christians through the ages have understood themselves not only to belong to the societal community of everyday life but simultaneously also to a spiritual community that exceeds tangible social connections. There is in other words a certain metaphorical doubleness of Christian existence. Christians are not only members of a certain social group, but always also members of the household of God. Christians are not only citizens of a certain nation, but always also citizens of God’s kingdom. A rethinking of Christian identity as a double identity in the deepest existential sense may help toward a re-imagination of our migratory situation, and it may facilitate new forms of participation with migrants who painfully experience a certain doubleness on a daily basis.
The Second Century Letter to Diognetus is an early Christian document describing such existential double belonging of Christians in very concrete terms: “They live in their own countries, but only as aliens. They have a share in everything as citizens, and endure everything as foreigners. […] They busy themselves on earth, but their citizenship is in heaven.”
The tension between being citizen and foreigner simultaneously – metaphorically speaking – needs to be maintained in the life of Christians. I believe a rethinking of such theological understanding of belonging to two worlds can stir our imagination in positive ways in a social situation in which migrants are denied a double belonging.
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
Michael Nausner: Methodism’s Migratory DNA as Resource for a Global Theology
Today's post is by regular contributor Dr. Michael Nausner, Professor of Theology, Prorektor, and Dean of International Affairs at the Reutlingen School of Theology.
As my colleagues David N. Field and Hendrik R. Pieterse have reminded us in previous blogs: To be sensitive to our context is not a tedious additional task of Christian faith and theology, but it is the flip side of the same coin. Our task is not only to do theology contextually, but – as H. Pieterse highlighted – to read context theologically. Yes, it is necessary if we want to be true to the old Methodist emphasis on prevenient grace. It belongs to our Methodist DNA to read our context theologically. Grace is for all and active ahead of us wherever we go. One of the most poignant formulations of an original contextual theology in the Wesleyan spirit can be found in John Wesley’s own musings on the presence of God in the world. He was convinced that for those “pure in heart” God is discernable in all that God has created and made. They see God “filling all in all”. (cf. Sermon 23,6) From the perspective of a Wesleyan theology of grace there can be no doubt: context can and needs to teach us theology.
My suggestion here is to reconsider the context of global migration as a theological chance par excellence to get focussed on our calling as United Methodists. We do not have to travel to realize that our everyday context is a global one, or rather a glocal one, meaning that global conditions permeate our various local contexts. In Europe in general and in Germany in particular, migration is one of the main examples of our glocal co-existence. The discourses about migration, however, most often depict it as a threat from the outside: The others come to take our privileges, rights, and resources away…
It is meaningful therefore to remember the Biblical and historical roots of our own migratory DNA as Methodists and as Christians in general, because such memory can become an effective remedy against the poison of a polarizing view that pitches insiders against outsiders, citizens against aliens, one ethnicity against the other. Too often in public discourse and in the media we hear a polarizing discourse. The church and the Methodist connexion as a worldwide network need to actively resist such categorizing and stereotyping forces in public discourse. Seyla Benhabib reminds us: There is a deep and troubling human rights issue emerging in the midst of our so called civilized and enlightened world, because continuously universal human rights are getting into conflict with citizens’ rights. (cf. Benhabib, The Rights of Others) The gap between the rights of those who are supposed to be protected by Fortress Europe and those who are perceived as a threat to Europe remains a troubling one. The thousands who die in the Mediterranean symbolize in a deeply tragic way our unwillingness to be part of a truly global world community. They are a sign, as Pope Francis has put it so poignantly, of a globalization of indifference.
The church, born in diversity (cf. Acts 2), has an important prophetic role to play in a Europe that very late and rather unwillingly acknowledged the values of diversity. Liberal nation states from the beginning granted democratic and citizens’ rights to those belonging to the nation, and only to them. The liberalism of the 19th century was not based on a principal recognition of diversity, but rather depended on the development of national unity and ethnic homogenization. Such reluctance to embrace diversity is a historic burden Europe still has to grapple with. It also explains why the rapidly increasing number of people of multiple belonging is seen as such a problem. In Europe still the billiard-ball-model of cultures seems to be embraced by the majority of people, as if cultures were best described with the metaphor of a container that needs to be protected. People with both-and-identities get into trouble in a world of such imaginations. Sadly oftentimes only the economic arguments have political force: Europe needs a steady non-European influx of workers and professionals to keep the economy growing. Many businesses take this seriously, but the criminalization of immigration and the rising surplus of businesses dealing with manual production go hand in hand. The concrete consequence is that migrants simultaneously are stripped of basic human rights and used to fuel the hunger of an exclusively surplus oriented globalized economy.
These troubling insights from our migratory context should remind Methodists of their own heritage. Methodism as a global movement is unthinkable without the continuous renewing effects of migration. Historically, ecclesiologically, and theologically Methodism is characterized by a certain basic mobility. Ever since John Wesley geographical mobility has been an emblem of the Methodist movement. Itinerant preachers became a visible sign for one of the earliest designs of the Methodist movement: to spread scriptural holiness across the land and eventually across the globe. But even here the context is important: the Methodist awakening was taking place amidst an emerging imperial order, and its spread was facilitated by the many migrating movements that are part and parcel of any colonizing empire.
David Hempton points out that the founding conference of 1784 did not send out missionaries “to export Methodism but to service and expand an existing constituency of migrants.” (D. Hempton, Empire of the Spirit, 151) Serving migrants, thus, was the raison d’etre of Methodism from the beginning. This remained true throughout the 19th century. But it was not only spiritual power that fueled the growth of Methodism. Among the contributing factors to its growth was the rise of domestic and international markets as well as the spread of the British Empire. Methodism was symbiotic with these factors. There is undoubtedly something ambiguous in Methodism’s mobility, something that is still seen in the setup of the global UMC today. Methodism was and is on the one hand instrumental in building egalitarian communities, but on the other hand it allowed itself to become a handmaid of the expansion of Western civilization. The Methodist global connection needs to be wary of any attempts to spread sedentary Western style Christianity lest it buys into the polarization of sedentary church communities that need to “take care” of migrating people. Instead it needs to recover key notions of its ecclesial identity, which is an identity that is migratory all the way down, both historically and theologically. A critical look back is needed, but also a continuous sensitivity for remaining colonial patterns and patterns of cultural dominance. After all the history of the Methodist movement as a migrating community and in service for migrating communities is an ambiguous one, and the way in which “the world is our parish” needs to be continuously re-evaluated.
As my colleagues David N. Field and Hendrik R. Pieterse have reminded us in previous blogs: To be sensitive to our context is not a tedious additional task of Christian faith and theology, but it is the flip side of the same coin. Our task is not only to do theology contextually, but – as H. Pieterse highlighted – to read context theologically. Yes, it is necessary if we want to be true to the old Methodist emphasis on prevenient grace. It belongs to our Methodist DNA to read our context theologically. Grace is for all and active ahead of us wherever we go. One of the most poignant formulations of an original contextual theology in the Wesleyan spirit can be found in John Wesley’s own musings on the presence of God in the world. He was convinced that for those “pure in heart” God is discernable in all that God has created and made. They see God “filling all in all”. (cf. Sermon 23,6) From the perspective of a Wesleyan theology of grace there can be no doubt: context can and needs to teach us theology.
My suggestion here is to reconsider the context of global migration as a theological chance par excellence to get focussed on our calling as United Methodists. We do not have to travel to realize that our everyday context is a global one, or rather a glocal one, meaning that global conditions permeate our various local contexts. In Europe in general and in Germany in particular, migration is one of the main examples of our glocal co-existence. The discourses about migration, however, most often depict it as a threat from the outside: The others come to take our privileges, rights, and resources away…
It is meaningful therefore to remember the Biblical and historical roots of our own migratory DNA as Methodists and as Christians in general, because such memory can become an effective remedy against the poison of a polarizing view that pitches insiders against outsiders, citizens against aliens, one ethnicity against the other. Too often in public discourse and in the media we hear a polarizing discourse. The church and the Methodist connexion as a worldwide network need to actively resist such categorizing and stereotyping forces in public discourse. Seyla Benhabib reminds us: There is a deep and troubling human rights issue emerging in the midst of our so called civilized and enlightened world, because continuously universal human rights are getting into conflict with citizens’ rights. (cf. Benhabib, The Rights of Others) The gap between the rights of those who are supposed to be protected by Fortress Europe and those who are perceived as a threat to Europe remains a troubling one. The thousands who die in the Mediterranean symbolize in a deeply tragic way our unwillingness to be part of a truly global world community. They are a sign, as Pope Francis has put it so poignantly, of a globalization of indifference.
The church, born in diversity (cf. Acts 2), has an important prophetic role to play in a Europe that very late and rather unwillingly acknowledged the values of diversity. Liberal nation states from the beginning granted democratic and citizens’ rights to those belonging to the nation, and only to them. The liberalism of the 19th century was not based on a principal recognition of diversity, but rather depended on the development of national unity and ethnic homogenization. Such reluctance to embrace diversity is a historic burden Europe still has to grapple with. It also explains why the rapidly increasing number of people of multiple belonging is seen as such a problem. In Europe still the billiard-ball-model of cultures seems to be embraced by the majority of people, as if cultures were best described with the metaphor of a container that needs to be protected. People with both-and-identities get into trouble in a world of such imaginations. Sadly oftentimes only the economic arguments have political force: Europe needs a steady non-European influx of workers and professionals to keep the economy growing. Many businesses take this seriously, but the criminalization of immigration and the rising surplus of businesses dealing with manual production go hand in hand. The concrete consequence is that migrants simultaneously are stripped of basic human rights and used to fuel the hunger of an exclusively surplus oriented globalized economy.
These troubling insights from our migratory context should remind Methodists of their own heritage. Methodism as a global movement is unthinkable without the continuous renewing effects of migration. Historically, ecclesiologically, and theologically Methodism is characterized by a certain basic mobility. Ever since John Wesley geographical mobility has been an emblem of the Methodist movement. Itinerant preachers became a visible sign for one of the earliest designs of the Methodist movement: to spread scriptural holiness across the land and eventually across the globe. But even here the context is important: the Methodist awakening was taking place amidst an emerging imperial order, and its spread was facilitated by the many migrating movements that are part and parcel of any colonizing empire.
David Hempton points out that the founding conference of 1784 did not send out missionaries “to export Methodism but to service and expand an existing constituency of migrants.” (D. Hempton, Empire of the Spirit, 151) Serving migrants, thus, was the raison d’etre of Methodism from the beginning. This remained true throughout the 19th century. But it was not only spiritual power that fueled the growth of Methodism. Among the contributing factors to its growth was the rise of domestic and international markets as well as the spread of the British Empire. Methodism was symbiotic with these factors. There is undoubtedly something ambiguous in Methodism’s mobility, something that is still seen in the setup of the global UMC today. Methodism was and is on the one hand instrumental in building egalitarian communities, but on the other hand it allowed itself to become a handmaid of the expansion of Western civilization. The Methodist global connection needs to be wary of any attempts to spread sedentary Western style Christianity lest it buys into the polarization of sedentary church communities that need to “take care” of migrating people. Instead it needs to recover key notions of its ecclesial identity, which is an identity that is migratory all the way down, both historically and theologically. A critical look back is needed, but also a continuous sensitivity for remaining colonial patterns and patterns of cultural dominance. After all the history of the Methodist movement as a migrating community and in service for migrating communities is an ambiguous one, and the way in which “the world is our parish” needs to be continuously re-evaluated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)